From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ot0-f200.google.com (mail-ot0-f200.google.com [74.125.82.200]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C93486B0005 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2018 02:14:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-ot0-f200.google.com with SMTP id q6-v6so3948554otf.20 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 23:14:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-sor-f65.google.com (mail-sor-f65.google.com. [209.85.220.65]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id u48-v6sor290891otf.172.2018.06.25.23.14.26 for (Google Transport Security); Mon, 25 Jun 2018 23:14:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20180622210542.2025-1-malat@debian.org> <20180625171513.31845-1-malat@debian.org> <20180625180717.GS28965@dhcp22.suse.cz> In-Reply-To: <20180625180717.GS28965@dhcp22.suse.cz> From: Mathieu Malaterre Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 08:14:13 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm/memblock: add missing include Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: Andrew Morton , Tony Luck , Pavel Tatashin , Daniel Jordan , Steven Sistare , Daniel Vacek , Stefan Agner , Joe Perches , Andy Shevchenko , linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 8:07 PM Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Mon 25-06-18 19:15:12, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: > > Commit 26f09e9b3a06 ("mm/memblock: add memblock memory allocation apis") > > introduced two new function definitions: > > > > memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid_nopanic() > > memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid() > > > > Commit ea1f5f3712af ("mm: define memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid_raw") > > introduced the following function definition: > > > > memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid_raw() > > > > This commit adds an include of header file to provide > > the missing function prototypes. Silence the following gcc warning > > (W=1): > > > > mm/memblock.c:1334:15: warning: no previous prototype for `memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid_raw' [-Wmissing-prototypes] > > mm/memblock.c:1371:15: warning: no previous prototype for `memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid_nopanic' [-Wmissing-prototypes] > > mm/memblock.c:1407:15: warning: no previous prototype for `memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid' [-Wmissing-prototypes] > > > > It also adds #ifdef blockers to prevent compilation failure on mips/ia64 > > where CONFIG_NO_BOOTMEM=n. Because Makefile already does: > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK) += memblock.o > > > > The #ifdef has been simplified from: > > > > #if defined(CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK) && defined(CONFIG_NO_BOOTMEM) > > > > to simply: > > > > #if defined(CONFIG_NO_BOOTMEM) > > Well, I would apreciate an explanation why do we need NO_BOOTMEM guard > in the first place rather than why HAVE_MEMBLOCK is not needed. Right, I am missing the explicit reference to commit 6cc22dc08a247b ("revert "mm/memblock: add missing include ""), I can tweak the commit message in a v3. > > Suggested-by: Tony Luck > > Suggested-by: Michal Hocko > > Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre > > Anyway this looks better. I wish we can actually get rid of bootmem > allocator which would simplify this as well but that is another topic. > > Acked-by: Michal Hocko Thanks ! > > --- > > v2: Simplify #ifdef > > > > mm/memblock.c | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c > > index 03d48d8835ba..611a970ac902 100644 > > --- a/mm/memblock.c > > +++ b/mm/memblock.c > > @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ > > #include > > #include > > #include > > +#include > > > > #include > > #include > > @@ -1224,6 +1225,7 @@ phys_addr_t __init memblock_alloc_try_nid(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, i > > return memblock_alloc_base(size, align, MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE); > > } > > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_NO_BOOTMEM) > > /** > > * memblock_virt_alloc_internal - allocate boot memory block > > * @size: size of memory block to be allocated in bytes > > @@ -1431,6 +1433,7 @@ void * __init memblock_virt_alloc_try_nid( > > (u64)max_addr); > > return NULL; > > } > > +#endif > > > > /** > > * __memblock_free_early - free boot memory block > > -- > > 2.11.0 > > > > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs