linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the driver-core tree

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Thu, 5 Jan 2012 01:01:51 +0100
From:	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the driver-core tree

On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 00:48, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:

> Kay, Greg, any hints would be nice.  The tip tree commit is adding this:
>
> bool cpu_is_hotpluggable(unsigned cpu)
> {
>        struct sys_device *dev = get_cpu_sysdev(cpu);
>        return dev && container_of(dev, struct cpu, sysdev)->hotpluggable;
> }
>
> and, of course, all the sys_device stuff has now gone ...
>
> So is this correct?
>
> bool cpu_is_hotpluggable(unsigned cpu)
> {
>        struct device *dev = get_cpu_device(cpu);
>        return dev && container_of(dev, struct cpu, dev)->hotpluggable;
> }

Yes, that look like the right pattern.

Stephen, thanks a lot for your help here, it's very much appreciated.
I know we cause a lot of trouble every other year. :)

Thanks,
Kay
--
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/