On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 07:48:09PM +0200, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 07:39:26PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, May 23 2023 at 19:33, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, May 23 2023 at 18:24, Uladzislau Rezki wrote:
> > >> On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 04:02:09PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > >> mm/vmalloc.c: In function ‘_vm_unmap_aliases’:
> > >> mm/vmalloc.c:2220:19: error: ‘struct vmap_block_queue’ has no member named ‘vmap_blocks’
> > >> 2220 | xa_for_each(&vbq->vmap_blocks, idx, vb) {
> > >> | ^~
> > >
> > > Duh. I surely had that compile fail fixed before I boot tested that
> > > pile. And then I did something stupid obviously.
> >
> > No. This one not. I only had the one in the last patch (missing
> > force_purge argument)
> >
> > And this one makes me scratch my head:
> >
> > struct vmap_block_queue {
> > spinlock_t lock;
> > struct list_head free;
> >
> > /*
> > * An xarray requires an extra memory dynamically to
> > * be allocated. If it is an issue, we can use rb-tree
> > * instead.
> > */
> > struct xarray vmap_blocks;
> > };
> >
> >
> > So how can your compiler complain?
> >
> > >> mm/vmalloc.c:2220:19: error: ‘struct vmap_block_queue’ has no member named ‘vmap_blocks’
> > >> 2220 | xa_for_each(&vbq->vmap_blocks, idx, vb) {
> >
> > Mine does not, but I might be missing something.
> >
> Right. I have applied your patches on the v6.3 what is not correct. I
> thought it should be fine, because that part was not touched quite a
> lot of time. Apparently, me, Lorenzo and Baoquan placed the vmap_blocks
> under the vmap_block_queue structure.
>
> So, v6.3 does not contain that patch. I have to use the next instead.
>
My fault :)
--
Uladzislau Rezki
