[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20110106151815.9e5c2a1e.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 15:18:15 +1100
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the percpu tree
Hi Tejun,
On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 06:13:14 +0100 Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 03:21:05PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > After merging the percpu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
> > allmodconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/therm_throt.c: In function 'intel_thermal_interrupt':
> > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/therm_throt.c:368: error: implicit declaration of function 'this_cpu_has'
> >
> > Caused by commit 6ac0bb7148b93fb40bccba5dff06d51a3e3ea283 ("x86: use
> > this_cpu_has for thermal_interrupt").
> >
> > this_cpu_has() does not exist anywhere except in this introduced usage.
> >
> > I have used the percpu tree from next-20101231 for today.
>
> My apologies. I forgot an earlier patch to introduce this_cpu_has()
> macro. I've reverted the offending commit.
But that revert is not in your published for-next branch yet. I have
manually reverted that commit for today.
--
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