| Message ID | b3f658d9-efc5-e532-e8d4-162494b88194@linux.vnet.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v02] powerpc/mobility: Fix node detach/rename problem | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| snowpatch_ozlabs/apply_patch | success | next/apply_patch Successfully applied |
| snowpatch_ozlabs/checkpatch | fail | Test checkpatch on branch next |
| snowpatch_ozlabs/build-ppc64le | fail | Test build-ppc64le on branch next |
| snowpatch_ozlabs/build-ppc64be | fail | Test build-ppc64be on branch next |
| snowpatch_ozlabs/build-ppc64e | success | Test build-ppc64e on branch next |
| snowpatch_ozlabs/build-ppc32 | success | Test build-ppc32 on branch next |
Michael Bringmann <mwb@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c > index e245a88..efc9442 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c > +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c > @@ -22,6 +22,9 @@ > #include <asm/rtas.h> > #include "pseries.h" > > +extern int of_free_phandle_cache(void); > +extern void of_populate_phandle_cache(void); We don't do that, they should be in a header. But that's a minor problem given that the patch doesn't compile, because both those functions are static. Presumably you have a hack in your tree to make them non-static? Please try and compile your patches in a clean tree before sending. cheers
On 08/08/2018 09:02 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Michael Bringmann <mwb@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c >> index e245a88..efc9442 100644 >> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c >> @@ -22,6 +22,9 @@ >> #include <asm/rtas.h> >> #include "pseries.h" >> >> +extern int of_free_phandle_cache(void); >> +extern void of_populate_phandle_cache(void); > > We don't do that, they should be in a header. > > But that's a minor problem given that the patch doesn't compile, because > both those functions are static. I am building against the latest 'linux-ppc' kernel. It includes patch Commit b9952b5218added5577e4a3443969bc20884cea9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:00:07 -0700 Subject: of: overlay: update phandle cache on overlay apply and remove which makes the functions static. I will rebuild and test with an earlier version if you will specify which one. > > Presumably you have a hack in your tree to make them non-static? > Please try and compile your patches in a clean tree before sending. > > cheers Regards, Michael
I will update the header files 'of_private.h' and 'of.h' and repost. Michael On 08/08/2018 10:37 AM, Michael Bringmann wrote: > On 08/08/2018 09:02 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote: >> Michael Bringmann <mwb@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: >>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c >>> index e245a88..efc9442 100644 >>> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c >>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c >>> @@ -22,6 +22,9 @@ >>> #include <asm/rtas.h> >>> #include "pseries.h" >>> >>> +extern int of_free_phandle_cache(void); >>> +extern void of_populate_phandle_cache(void); >> >> We don't do that, they should be in a header. >> >> But that's a minor problem given that the patch doesn't compile, because >> both those functions are static. > > I am building against the latest 'linux-ppc' kernel. It includes patch > > Commit b9952b5218added5577e4a3443969bc20884cea9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> > Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:00:07 -0700 > Subject: of: overlay: update phandle cache on overlay apply and remove > > which makes the functions static. I will rebuild and test with an > earlier version if you will specify which one. > >> >> Presumably you have a hack in your tree to make them non-static? >> Please try and compile your patches in a clean tree before sending. >> >> cheers > > Regards, > Michael >
Michael Bringmann <mwb@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: > On 08/08/2018 09:02 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote: >> Michael Bringmann <mwb@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes: >>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c >>> index e245a88..efc9442 100644 >>> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c >>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c >>> @@ -22,6 +22,9 @@ >>> #include <asm/rtas.h> >>> #include "pseries.h" >>> >>> +extern int of_free_phandle_cache(void); >>> +extern void of_populate_phandle_cache(void); >> >> We don't do that, they should be in a header. >> >> But that's a minor problem given that the patch doesn't compile, because >> both those functions are static. > > I am building against the latest 'linux-ppc' kernel. It includes patch OK you must be using the master branch. > Commit b9952b5218added5577e4a3443969bc20884cea9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> > Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 14:00:07 -0700 > Subject: of: overlay: update phandle cache on overlay apply and remove That only landed in v4.18-rc6, so it's not in my next branch which is where patches like this targeted for the next release are applied. > which makes the functions static. I will rebuild and test with an > earlier version if you will specify which one. No that's fine it will just have to wait until next and master are merged before it can go in. cheers
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c index e245a88..efc9442 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/mobility.c @@ -22,6 +22,9 @@ #include <asm/rtas.h> #include "pseries.h" +extern int of_free_phandle_cache(void); +extern void of_populate_phandle_cache(void); + static struct kobject *mobility_kobj; struct update_props_workarea { @@ -343,6 +346,8 @@ void post_mobility_fixup(void) rc = rtas_call(activate_fw_token, 0, 1, NULL); } while (rtas_busy_delay(rc)); + of_free_phandle_cache(); + if (rc) printk(KERN_ERR "Post-mobility activate-fw failed: %d\n", rc); @@ -354,6 +359,8 @@ void post_mobility_fixup(void) /* Possibly switch to a new RFI flush type */ pseries_setup_rfi_flush(); + of_populate_phandle_cache(); + return; }