On Mon, 13 Jan 2014 09:27:44 -0500 Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxx> wrote: > > It seems to me to be absolutely silly to have code introduce a warning > > yet push the fix for the warning via a completely different tree... > > > I mixed it up. Sorry. Some how I thought there was some other build > configuration thrown the same warning with memblock series and hence > suggested the patch to go via Andrew's tree. Yes, I too had assumed that the warning was caused by the bootmem patches in -mm. But it in fact occurs in Linus's current tree. I'll drop mm-arm-fix-arms-__ffs-to-conform-to-avoid-warning-with-no_bootmem.patch and I'll assume that rmk will fix this up at an appropriate time. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>