[powerpc:next-test 125/127] arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/pkeys.c:392:7: error: implicit declaration of function 'is_pkey_enabled'; did you mean

[Michael Ellerman]

"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar at linux.ibm.com> writes:
> On 7/17/20 7:29 AM, kernel test robot wrote:
>> tree:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/powerpc/linux.git next-test
>> head:   0fbd1eb4df96e1cbd039e0b95fdf62cf65a7faf9
>> commit: ed411c66eea2ccf93a634ae661a1f79c2bc63d88 [125/127] powerpc/book3s64/pkeys: Remove is_pkey_enabled()
>> config: powerpc-allmodconfig (attached as .config)
>> compiler: powerpc64-linux-gcc (GCC) 9.3.0
>> reproduce (this is a W=1 build):
>>          wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
>>          chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
>>          git checkout ed411c66eea2ccf93a634ae661a1f79c2bc63d88
>>          # save the attached .config to linux build tree
>>          COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=gcc-9.3.0 make.cross ARCH=powerpc
>> 
>> If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp at intel.com>
>> 
>> All errors (new ones prefixed by >>):
>> 
>>     arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/pkeys.c: In function 'pkey_access_permitted':
>>>> arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/pkeys.c:392:7: error: implicit declaration of function 'is_pkey_enabled'; did you mean 'arch_pkeys_enabled'? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>>       392 |  if (!is_pkey_enabled(pkey))
>>           |       ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>           |       arch_pkeys_enabled
>>     cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
>> 
>> vim +392 arch/powerpc/mm/book3s64/pkeys.c
>> 
>
>
> We removed that upstream in
>
> 19ab500edb5d6020010caba48ce3b4ce4182ab63     powerpc/mm/pkeys: Make pkey 
> access check work on execute_only_key
>
> next-test need to be rebased?

I don't rebase next onto master.

I'll merge fixes prior to applying your series.

cheers