[PATCH v3] powerpc/mm: fix undefined reference to `.__kernel_map_pages' on FSL PPC64

[Kim Phillips]

On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 14:22:02 +1100
Michael Ellerman <mpe at ellerman.id.au> wrote:

> On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 18:57 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 28 Jan 2015 10:33:59 +0900 Joonsoo Kim <js1304 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > 2015-01-28 10:01 GMT+09:00 Michael Ellerman <mpe at ellerman.id.au>:
> > > > On Mon, 2015-01-26 at 13:22 -0600, Kim Phillips wrote:
> > > >> arch/powerpc has __kernel_map_pages implementations in mm/pgtable_32.c, and
> > > >
> > > > I'd be happy to take this through the powerpc tree for 3.20, but for this:
> > > >
> > > >> depends on:
> > > >> From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim at lge.com>
> > > >> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 10:28:58 +0900
> > > >> Subject: [PATCH] mm/debug_pagealloc: fix build failure on ppc and some other archs
> > > >
> > > > I don't have that patch in my tree.
> > > >
> > > > But in what way does this patch depend on that one?
> > > >
> > > > It looks to me like it'd be safe to take this on its own, or am I wrong?
> > > 
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > These two patches are merged to Andrew's tree now.
> > 
> > That didn't answer either of Michael's questions ;)
> > 
> > Yes, I think they're independent.  I was holding off on the powerpc

sorry - my bad, they are indeed completely independent.

> > one, waiting to see if it popped up in linux-next via your tree.  I can
> > merge both if you like?
> 
> Right, I didn't think I'd seen it in your tree :)
> 
> I'm happy to take this one, saves a possible merge conflict.

I'm fine either way (I work on linux-next).

Kim