linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the cpufreq 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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-id: <13197479.540821330911965933.JavaMail.weblogic@epv6ml06>
Date:	Mon, 05 Mar 2012 01:46:07 +0000 (GMT)
From:	MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>
Cc:	"linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	박경민 <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
	"RafaelJ.Wysocki<rjw"@sisk.pl, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the cpufreq tree

Hello,

The patch "CPUfreq ondemand: handle QoS request on DVFS response latency" that introduced the mentioned errors requires the patch "PM / QoS: Introduce new classes: DMA-Throughput and DVFS-Latency" get merged, too. I guess that patch will be at pm-qos tree if get merged (v2 patch has been released 7 days ago).


Cheers!
MyungJoo.

------- Original Message -------
Sender : Stephen Rothwell<sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Date : 2012-03-01 11:56 (GMT+09:00)
Title : linux-next: build failure after merge of the cpufreq tree

Hi Dave,

After merging the cpufreq tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64
allmodconfig) failed like this:

drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c: In function 'cpufreq_gov_dbs_init':
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c:880:28: error: 'PM_QOS_DVFS_RESPONSE_LATENCY' undeclared (first use in this function)
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c: In function 'cpufreq_gov_dbs_exit':
drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c:896:25: error: 'PM_QOS_DVFS_RESPONSE_LATENCY' undeclared (first use in this function)

Caused by commit 500e8ca39c56 ("[CPUFREQ] ondemand: handle QoS request on
DVFS response latency").

I have used the cpufreq tree fomr next-20120229 for today.
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@...b.auug.org.au
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/



--
MyungJoo Ham (함명주), PHD
System S/W Lab, S/W Platform Team, Software Center
Samsung Electronics
Cell: +82-10-6714-2858