On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 09:53:25PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 08/15/2013 12:55 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> I screwed up my stable repo clone again :(, so the full build will take a > >> bit. > >> > >> mips builds on on 3.4 with all patches applied now fail with: > >> arch/mips/include/asm/page.h: Assembler messages: > >> arch/mips/include/asm/page.h:178: Error: Unrecognized opcode `static inline > >> int pfn_valid(unsigned long pfn)' > >> arch/mips/include/asm/page.h:179: Error: junk at end of line, first > >> unrecognized character is `{' > >> arch/mips/include/asm/page.h:181: Error: Unrecognized opcode `extern > >> unsigned long max_mapnr' > >> arch/mips/include/asm/page.h:183: Error: Unrecognized opcode `return > >> pfn>=ARCH_PFN_OFFSET&&pfn<max_mapnr' > >> arch/mips/include/asm/page.h:184: Error: junk at end of line, first > >> unrecognized character is `}' > >> > >> This is the error I referred to above. Reverting above pfn rework patch > >> fixes that problem, > >> so you might want to remove that patch from the patch queue for now. > > > > Perhaps this one got applied too soon? > > > > commit 730b8dfe016dd1e91f73d8d3e6724da91397171c > > Author: Ralf Baechle <ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Fri Dec 28 15:18:02 2012 +0100 > > > > MIPS: page.h: Remove now unnecessary #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ wrapper. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ralf Baechle <ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Actually, you are on the right track, only in the opposite direction. > The problem is that commit 8b9232141b changed > #define pfn_valid ... > to > static inline pfn_valid() > in arch/mips/include/asm/page.h. In the 3.4 kernel the file _is_ > still included from assembler code. This obviously doesn't work. > > Fix would be to surround the new static inline function with #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__. > With this change, "mips allmodconfig" compiles with the 3.4 kernel. > It should be a safe change, since the static inline will never be used > from assembler code. > > Question is if that would be acceptable as back-port of 8b9232141b to 3.4. > Greg, any comments ? If it is ok I can submit a back-port request with > the modified patch to -stable. That would be one more build fixed, > three to go (arm:allmodconfig, sparc32:defconfig, and sparc64:allmodconfig). That sounds reasonable to me, as it is a valid fix, and I do know of some MIPS people using 3.4 (although their versions all seem to be heavily patched, perhaps for issues like this, I don't really know...) So, feel free to send such a backport on to me. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html