Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 03 Jul 2008 08:53:52 -0700 | From | Jeremy Fitzhardinge <> | Subject | Re: linux-next: 1ea0704e (ptep_modify_prot transaction abstraction) breaks no-mmu |
| |
Mike Frysinger wrote: > the functions added to asm-generic/pgtable.h are only used by > mm/mprotect.c (a MMU-only file), but they were not added inside of the > CONFIG_MMU ifdef block. since the functions rely on things inside of > CONFIG_MMU (the lines just above in pgtable.h), we get build failure > on all no-mmu setups: > CC init/main.o > In file included from include/asm/pgtable.h:94, > from include/linux/mm.h:39, > from include/asm/dma.h:39, > from include/linux/bootmem.h:8, > from init/main.c:27: > include/asm-generic/pgtable.h: In function '__ptep_modify_prot_start': > include/asm-generic/pgtable.h:210: error: implicit declaration of > function 'ptep_get_and_clear' > include/asm-generic/pgtable.h:210: error: incompatible types in return > make[1]: *** [init/main.o] Error 1 > make: *** [init/main.o] Error 2 > -mike >
Uh, OK. What does mprotect do on a nommu system? Would it be sufficient to move the definitions of __ptep_modify_prot_start/commit out of a CONFIG_MMU block, or provide separate no-op versions?
J
| |