From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: linux-next: build failure after merge of the akpm tree Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 16:53:43 +1000 Message-ID: <20170626165343.46285c95@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:56629 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751437AbdFZGxw (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Jun 2017 02:53:52 -0400 Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton , David Miller Cc: Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Jag Raman , Michal Hocko Hi Andrew, After merging the akpm tree, today's linux-next build (sparc64 defconfig) failed like this: arch/sparc/kernel/mdesc.c: In function 'mdesc_kmalloc': arch/sparc/kernel/mdesc.c:208:48: error: '__GFP_REPEAT' undeclared (first use in this function) base = kmalloc(handle_size + 15, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_REPEAT); ^ Caused by commit 726ad49b664b ("mm, tree wide: replace __GFP_REPEAT by __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL with more useful semantic") interacting with commit 0ab2fcd69dbf ("sparc64: mdesc: use __GFP_REPEAT action modifier for VM allocation") from the sparc-next tree. For now I have applied the following (I expect it to be replaced with something better): From: Stephen Rothwell Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 16:47:46 +1000 Subject: [PATCH] paper over the removal of __GFP_REPEAT for now Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell --- arch/sparc/kernel/mdesc.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/sparc/kernel/mdesc.c b/arch/sparc/kernel/mdesc.c index e4b4e790bf89..c9ecd5abf5bf 100644 --- a/arch/sparc/kernel/mdesc.c +++ b/arch/sparc/kernel/mdesc.c @@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ static struct mdesc_handle *mdesc_kmalloc(unsigned int mdesc_size) handle_size = (sizeof(struct mdesc_handle) - sizeof(struct mdesc_hdr) + mdesc_size); - base = kmalloc(handle_size + 15, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_REPEAT); + base = kmalloc(handle_size + 15, GFP_KERNEL /* | __GFP_REPEAT */); if (!base) return NULL; -- 2.11.0 -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell