Hi Michael, On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 7:01 AM Michael Schmitz <schmitz...@gmail.com> wrote: > as far as I can see, at least DM_PERSISTENT_DATA, DM_BIO_PRISON, > DM_CACHE and DM_ERA all depend on dm_block_t which is defined as u64_t. > These would also have to be disabled. > > Are you positive these would cause overflows, if the rest of the DM code > and the block layer code limit disk utilization to what can be > represented by 32 bit sector_t?
I'm not positive about that. Needs more investigation. Or perhaps the DM people just know. > On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:56 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven > <ge...@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 10:49 AM Geert Uytterhoeven > > <ge...@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 10:34 AM Geert Uytterhoeven > >> <ge...@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > >> > On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 10:47 PM Michael Schmitz <schmitz...@gmail.com> > >> > wrote: > >> > > It's not just me - this happens when building without LBD support: > >> > > > >> > > ERROR: "__udivdi3" [drivers/md/dm-thin-pool.ko] undefined! > >> > > > >> > > Looks like DM_THIN_PROVISIONING should depend on LBD support being > >> > > enabled... > >> > > > >> > > This is with gcc 8.10 from kernel.org, FWIW. > >> > > >> > I can reproduce that with other compilers as well. > >> > > >> > Will send a fix. > >> > >> Oh, already fixed > >> > >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/?id=013ad043906b2befd4a9bfb06219ed9fedd92716 > > > > Making it depend on LBDAF may still be desirable. > > Care to send a patch? Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
