linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for November 12 (acpi/processor.h)

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <20091112094012.2ef401ad.randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
Date:	Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:40:12 -0800
From:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, lenb@...nel.org
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for November 12 (acpi/processor.h)

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.

---
~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/