Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 12 May 2022 19:13:18 +0800 | Subject | Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the mm tree | From | Baolin Wang <> |
| |
On 5/12/2022 7:07 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 07:38:55PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: >> After merging the mm tree, today's linux-next build (arm64 defconfig) >> failed like this: >> >> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c: In function 'huge_ptep_clear_flush': >> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c:493:16: error: implicit declaration of function 'get_clear_flush'; did you mean 'ptep_clear_flush'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] >> 493 | return get_clear_flush(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig); >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> | ptep_clear_flush >> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c:493:16: error: incompatible types when returning type 'int' but 'pte_t' was expected >> 493 | return get_clear_flush(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig); >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c:494:1: error: control reaches end of non-void function [-Werror=return-type] >> 494 | } >> | ^ >> >> Caused by commit >> >> 00df1f1a133b ("mm: change huge_ptep_clear_flush() to return the original pte") >> >> interacting with commit >> >> fb396bb459c1 ("arm64/hugetlb: Drop TLB flush from get_clear_flush()") >> >> I have applied the following merg fix patch for today. >> >> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> >> Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 19:33:11 +1000 >> Subject: [PATCH] fixup for "mm: change huge_ptep_clear_flush() to return the original pte" >> >> It interacts with commit >> >> fb396bb459c1 ("arm64/hugetlb: Drop TLB flush from get_clear_flush()") >> >> from the arm64 tree >> >> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> >> --- >> arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c >> index 5bdf913dedc7..30f5b76aabe9 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c >> @@ -490,7 +490,7 @@ pte_t huge_ptep_clear_flush(struct vm_area_struct *vma, >> return ptep_clear_flush(vma, addr, ptep); >> >> ncontig = find_num_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, &pgsize); >> - return get_clear_flush(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig); >> + return get_clear_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig); >> } > > Note that after the arm64 commit, get_clear_contig() no longer flushes > the TLB. So maybe something like: > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c > index 30f5b76aabe9..9a999550df8e 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/hugetlbpage.c > @@ -485,12 +485,15 @@ pte_t huge_ptep_clear_flush(struct vm_area_struct *vma, > { > size_t pgsize; > int ncontig; > + pte_t orig_pte; > > if (!pte_cont(READ_ONCE(*ptep))) > return ptep_clear_flush(vma, addr, ptep); > > ncontig = find_num_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, &pgsize); > - return get_clear_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig); > + orig_pte = get_clear_contig(vma->vm_mm, addr, ptep, pgsize, ncontig); > + flush_tlb_range(vma, addr, addr + pgsize * ncontig); > + return orig_pte; > }
Yes, after checking this fb396bb459c1 ("arm64/hugetlb: Drop TLB flush from get_clear_flush()"), I also realized it will miss TLB flush.
So I am not sure I need send a incremental patch to fix this issue? Or resend my patch set [1] with rebasing on the arm64 changes?
Catalin and Andrew, how do you think? Thanks.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1652270205.git.baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com/
| |