linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for November 12 (acpi_processor_get_bios

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:09:56 -0800
From:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
To:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, lenb@...nel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for November 12
 (acpi_processor_get_bios_limit)

On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:40:12 -0800 Randy Dunlap wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:51:01 +1100 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Changes since 20091111:
> > 
> > The cpufreq tree gained a conflict against the acpi tree.
> 
> when CONFIG_CPU_FREQ=n:
> 
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/processor.o: In function `acpi_processor_get_bios_limit':
> (.text+0x0): multiple definition of `acpi_processor_get_bios_limit'
> arch/x86/kernel/acpi/cstate.o:(.text+0x0): first defined here
> 
> 
> The function definition in include/apci/procssor.h needs to be "static inline"
> at line 323.

---
however, even with that fixed, when

CONFIG_CPU_FREQ=y
CONFIG_ACPI=n
CONFIG_SFI=y
CONFIG_APM=y

there is this build error:

arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k7.c:720: error: 'acpi_processor_get_bios_limit' undeclared here (not in a function)

---
~Randy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/