[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081216112019.GE4299@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2008 12:20:19 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-next <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [mmotm and linux-next][PATCH] irq: enclose irq_desc_lock_class
in CONFIG_LOCKDEP
* KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> >> > No, lockdep.h (which we forgot to include) already handles that:
> >> >
> >> > # define lockdep_set_class(lock, key) do { (void)(key); } while (0)
> >> >
> >> > the problem is that the code which references irq_desc_lock_class is
> >> > inside #ifdef CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ, so this is a better fix:
> >>
> >> agreed that this is the better fix - applied to tip/irq/sparseirq,
> >> thanks!
> >
> > actually, this breaks the build on !SPARSEIRQ because we will use that
> > class in the non-sparseirq case. So we've converted a build warning to
> > a build failure ;-)
>
> Please give me your .config and tell me your arch. my ia64 box (ia64 is
> !SPARSEIRQ) can build the akpm patch.
The expected build failure is obvious from reading the code:
#ifdef CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS
void early_init_irq_lock_class(void)
{
#ifndef CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ
struct irq_desc *desc;
int i;
for_each_irq_desc(i, desc) {
if (!desc)
continue;
lockdep_set_class(&desc->lock, &irq_desc_lock_class);
Note that it's an #ifndef sparseirq, not an #ifdef sparseirq condition.
Ingo
--
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