On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 07:24:39 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Oct 2018 07:12:40 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 11:26:37 -0700 Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > ALl ppc qemu tests (including big endian pseries) also generate a warning.
> > >
> > > WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at mm/memblock.c:1301 .memblock_alloc_range_nid+0x20/0x68
>
> That is:
>
> static phys_addr_t __init memblock_alloc_range_nid(phys_addr_t size,
> phys_addr_t align, phys_addr_t start,
> phys_addr_t end, int nid,
> enum memblock_flags flags)
> {
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!align))
> align = SMP_CACHE_BYTES;
>
> Looks like patch
>
> "memblock: stop using implicit alignment to SMP_CACHE_BYTES"
>
> missed some places ...
To be expected, I guess. I'm pretty relaxed about this ;) Let's do
another sweep in a week or so, after which we'll have a couple of
months to mop up any leftovers.
