[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8bd0f97a0812031955y5ab713baj3e9351816343d33a@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 22:55:48 -0500
From: "Mike Frysinger" <vapier.adi@...il.com>
To: "Rusty Russell" <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Cc: "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Russell King" <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Stephen Rothwell" <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: Yet more ARM breakage in linux-next
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 21:15, Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Thursday 04 December 2008 12:03:57 Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 18:22, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> > On Thursday 04 December 2008 07:11:09 Andrew Morton wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 3 Dec 2008 19:29:05 +0000
>> >>
>> >> Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> >> > This seems to be causing lots of ARM breakage:
>> >> >
>> >> > lib/find_next_bit.c:183: error: implicit declaration of function
>> >> > '__fls'
>> >> >
>> >> > Whoever's responsible,
>> >>
>> >> git-blame?
>> >
>> > It's me. Turns out sparc, avr32 and arm all don't define __fls in their
>> > asm/bitops.h, and I'm the first one to use it in generic code.
>>
>> the Blackfin port also does not ... you going to post a change for
>> that since the build breaks for Blackfin atm too ?
>
> Sure, why not join the party!
>
> (Hmm, maybe I should change that list to a shorter list of archs which
> *do* define __fls?)
>
> blackfin: define __fls
>
> Like fls, but can't be handed 0 and returns the bit number.
>
> (I broke this arch in linux-next by using __fls in generic code).
>
> Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
cheers
Acked-by: Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>
-mike
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists