From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (tip/s390 trees related) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 23:52:42 +0200 Message-ID: <1350683562.2768.78.camel@twins> References: <20121018172201.b81dcc8fe40868256f532364@canb.auug.org.au> <20121018150209.GB17439@linux-mips.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:55638 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932972Ab2JSVxd convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Oct 2012 17:53:33 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20121018150209.GB17439@linux-mips.org> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ralf Baechle Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Martin Schwidefsky , Heiko Carstens , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 17:02 +0200, Ralf Baechle wrote: > CC mm/huge_memory.o > mm/huge_memory.c: In function =E2=80=98do_huge_pmd_prot_none=E2=80=99= : > mm/huge_memory.c:789:3: error: incompatible type for argument 3 of =E2= =80=98update_mmu_cache=E2=80=99 That appears to have become update_mmu_cache_pmd(), which makes sense given that there's now architectures that care about it.