From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752296AbdLFVDD (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Dec 2017 16:03:03 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f67.google.com ([74.125.82.67]:33769 "EHLO mail-wm0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751720AbdLFVDB (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Dec 2017 16:03:01 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMYyrshR6J5+cE5DUUPjVv9m6G0vJzxRixiM+adqY7Eju7LFc7+BGNbysENt1urNoDd0XBNPdA== Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 22:02:57 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Dave Hansen , the arch/x86 maintainers , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mm/kaiser: avoid 32-bit/PAE build warning Message-ID: <20171206210257.xlijytwuhnpsh7he@gmail.com> References: <20171206141627.688219-1-arnd@arndb.de> <20171206171612.v5ucbi6yyeiks2yv@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > * Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 4:08 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: > >> > On 12/06/2017 07:03 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> >> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Maybe it's better to just to the last one-line change in include/linux/kaiser.h. > >> > > >> > Hi Arnd, > >> > > >> > Are you hitting this in -next? > >> > > >> > The newest version of this code has a single kpti_init() function that > >> > shouldn't have any of these problems. > >> > >> Yes, this is next-20171206, apparently it came in through tip/auto-latest, > >> which still has the same version. > > > > I'll update the -next version probably later today. > > Thanks! > > I just ran into another build error with KAISER: > > arch/x86/mm/kaiser.c:173:28: error: '__GFP_NOTRACK' undeclared (first > use in this function); did you mean '__GFP_NOFAIL'? > > When you do the update, can you check that it doesn't reference __GFP_NOTRACK? > Apparently the flag got removed in 4.15-rc1. Yeah, saw it too and fixed this one as well. Thanks, Ingo