From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (tip tree related) Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 09:32:23 -0700 Message-ID: <4C56F317.7030008@zytor.com> References: <20100803022310.bec3ba79.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20100802162810.GB4755@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:43580 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753663Ab0HBQdv (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Aug 2010 12:33:51 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20100802162810.GB4755@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Russell King Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , LKML , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra On 08/02/2010 09:28 AM, Russell King wrote: > On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 02:23:10AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Lots (if not all) of the arm builds failed for next-20100802 with these >> errors: >> >> arch/arm/mm/init.c: In function 'arm_bootmem_init': >> arch/arm/mm/init.c:184: error: implicit declaration of function 'memblock_start_pfn' >> arch/arm/mm/init.c:186: error: implicit declaration of function 'memblock_end_pfn' >> arch/arm/mm/init.c:188: error: implicit declaration of function 'memblock_size_bytes' >> >> Caused by commit 53e16bfaf19346f59b3502e207aa66c61332075c ("memblock: >> Introduce for_each_memblock() and new accessors, and use it") interacting >> with commit 2778f62056ada442414392d7ccd41188bb631619 ("ARM: initial LMB >> trial") and some others from the arm tree. > > Please, no, don't break the memblock code now. I'm not reworking the > ARM implementation just as the merge window has opened - especially > as the ARM implementation has now been pulled into other people's > trees. > > If there's changes to memblock which haven't been in linux-next (which, > as this is a new failure, that is most definitely the case), then they > shouldn't be going into this merge window. > Ben, what's your tack on this? -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.