Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc/mm: fix undefined reference to `.__kernel_map_pages' on FSL PPC64

From: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@freescale.com>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com>,
	Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@gmail.com>,
	Konstantin Khlebnikov <k.khlebnikov@samsung.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	"Linux Memory Management List" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	<josh@joshtriplett.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@fb.com>, Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
	linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc/mm: fix undefined reference to `.__kernel_map_pages' on FSL PPC64
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2015 14:14:17 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150128141417.ba2e413fd8ccc8bfd65196e1@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1422415322.32234.3.camel@ellerman.id.au>

On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 14:22:02 +1100
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:

> On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 18:57 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 10:33:59 +0900 Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > 2015-01-28 10:01 GMT+09:00 Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>:
> > > > On Mon, 2015-01-26 at 13:22 -0600, Kim Phillips wrote:
> > > >> arch/powerpc has __kernel_map_pages implementations in mm/pgtable_32.c, and
> > > >
> > > > I'd be happy to take this through the powerpc tree for 3.20, but for this:
> > > >
> > > >> depends on:
> > > >> From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
> > > >> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 10:28:58 +0900
> > > >> Subject: [PATCH] mm/debug_pagealloc: fix build failure on ppc and some other archs
> > > >
> > > > I don't have that patch in my tree.
> > > >
> > > > But in what way does this patch depend on that one?
> > > >
> > > > It looks to me like it'd be safe to take this on its own, or am I wrong?
> > > 
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > These two patches are merged to Andrew's tree now.
> > 
> > That didn't answer either of Michael's questions ;)
> > 
> > Yes, I think they're independent.  I was holding off on the powerpc

sorry - my bad, they are indeed completely independent.

> > one, waiting to see if it popped up in linux-next via your tree.  I can
> > merge both if you like?
> 
> Right, I didn't think I'd seen it in your tree :)
> 
> I'm happy to take this one, saves a possible merge conflict.

I'm fine either way (I work on linux-next).

Kim