[lkml]   [2017]   [Aug]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: linux-next: build failure after merge of the akpm-current tree
Hi Stephen,

The warning after removing __pmd() is caused by a gcc bug:
so (pmd_t) {0} causes warning in some GCC versions.

__pmd() is defined in alpha, arm, arm64, frv, ia64, m32r, m68k, microblaze, mips, parisc,
powerpc, s390, sh, sparc, tile, um, x86, and asm-generic, according to

I am not sure about whether arc, blackfin, c6x, cris, h8300, hexagon, metag, mn10300, nios2, score,
xtensa use __pmd() in asm-generic or not.

I am looking for other workarounds for this warning now.

Best Regards,
Yan Zi

On 1 Aug 2017, at 6:50, Stephen Rothwell wrote:

> Hi all,
> On Tue, 1 Aug 2017 16:39:04 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <> wrote:
>> After merging the akpm tree, today's linux-next build (sparc defconfig)
>> failed like this:
>> In file included from mm/vmscan.c:55:0:
>> include/linux/swapops.h: In function 'swp_entry_to_pmd':
>> include/linux/swapops.h:226:9: error: implicit declaration of function '__pmd' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>> return __pmd(0);
>> ^
>> include/linux/swapops.h:226:9: error: incompatible types when returning type 'int' but 'pmd_t {aka struct <anonymous>}' was expected
>> Caused by commit
>> 9bb18490758c ("mm-thp-enable-thp-migration-in-generic-path-fix")
>> It looks like sparc 32 bit has no __pmd() ...
>> I have reverted that commit for today.
> OK, that is a pain as it causes many build warnings some of which are
> treated as errors :-( (see e.g.
> So maybe
> we need to fix sthe sparc32 build instead? Are there any other
> architectures/platforms that do not define __pmd() ?
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-08-01 13:30    [W:0.051 / U:9.968 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site