[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20081118153346.62bf9c11.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 15:33:46 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@...el.com>
Subject: linux-next: cpu_alloc tree patch (Was: Re: next-20081106: undefined
reference to `__per_cpu_start')
Hi Christoph,
On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 12:40:17 -0600 (CST) Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> All of these have no invocation of the PERCPU macro from
> asm-generic/vmlinus.lds.h in their arch vmlinux.lds.S. Thus the symbols
> are missing. They are kind of irrelevant since we are only interested in
> the difference between those...
>
> Either we add the PERCPU() macro invocations to each arches vmlinux.lds.S
> file or we need to special case each time __per_cpu_end/__start is used.
> The only use added for the cpu allocator is in include/linux/percpu.h
>
> Make it conditional on CONFIG_SMP
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
I have applied this to linux-next today. It is not clear to me if this
is a fix for the cpu_alloc tree or the zero-based per_cpu area patches or
a combination of both. If the first, please apply this to the cpu_alloc
tree or I will have to drop the tree. Otherwise, let me know where it
belongs.
Also, considering the "discussions" between Rusty and yourself, I may
need to drop the cpu_alloc tree until they are resolved.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell sfr@...b.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists