linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 1/1] Kernel compile bug in 2.6.22.6/7 {maybe more} ARM/StrongARM

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:	Tue, 25 Sep 2007 12:31:38 -0500
From:	<Greg.Chandler@...lsfargo.com>
To:	<rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>, <cpufreq@...ts.linux.org.uk>,
	<davej@...hat.com>
Cc:	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/1] Kernel compile bug in 2.6.22.6/7 {maybe more} ARM/StrongARM


Well then, now I guess I know why the FB isn't working...
Sorry to open up the can of worms this turned out to be {after reading
all the other replies first}...

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Russell King [mailto:rmk@....linux.org.uk] On Behalf Of Russell
King
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 2:32 AM
To: Chandler, Greg; cpufreq@...ts.linux.org.uk; davej@...hat.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; dan.j.williams@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Kernel compile bug in 2.6.22.6/7 {maybe more}
ARM/StrongARM

On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 05:53:57PM -0500, Greg.Chandler@...lsfargo.com
wrote:
> I was building a kernel for an iPaq {SA1110} and ran into this.
> 
> linux-2.6.22.7/arch/arm/mach-sa1100/generic.c:
> Has a: #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> Then afterwards there is a: #if defined(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_SA1100) ||
> defined(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_SA1110)
> who's else section redefines the cpufreq_get function inhereited from 
> the header....
> 
> I'm guessing no one ever ended up in the "else" section until now, and

> that the header was added some time ago and no one caught this.
> This patch worked for me to get rid of the compile time problems.  I'm

> having issues with the kernel, but as far as I can tell they are form 
> the Frame buffer and not because of this.  If this assessment is 
> correct {the not needing this code anymore} then please pass this 
> along so it makes it into an upcoming release.
> 
> --- linux-2.6.22.7/arch/arm/mach-sa1100/generic.c.orig  2007-09-24 
> 17:36:21.000000000 -0500
> +++ linux-2.6.22.7/arch/arm/mach-sa1100/generic.c       2007-09-24
> 17:40:02.000000000 -0500
> @@ -107,15 +107,6 @@ unsigned int sa11x0_getspeed(unsigned in
>         return cclk_frequency_100khz[PPCR & 0xf] * 100;  }
> 
> -#else
> -/*
> - * We still need to provide this so building without cpufreq works.
> - */
> -unsigned int cpufreq_get(unsigned int cpu) -{
> -       return cclk_frequency_100khz[PPCR & 0xf] * 100;
> -}
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpufreq_get);
>  #endif
> 
>  /*

No.  That code is required - the StrongARM 1100 framebuffer driver
*needs* to know what the CPU frequency is so it can set the pixel clock
divisor.

The real problem is the silly people who added this to cpufreq.h:

#ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ
unsigned int cpufreq_quick_get(unsigned int cpu); unsigned int
cpufreq_get(unsigned int cpu); #else static inline unsigned int
cpufreq_quick_get(unsigned int cpu) {
        return 0;
}
static inline unsigned int cpufreq_get(unsigned int cpu) {
        return 0;
}
#endif

which utterly bogus.

--
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:

-
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/