[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130924145911.GA8494@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 16:59:11 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>,
Hedi Berriche <hedi@....com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] x86/UV/KDB/NMI: Updates for NMI/KDB handler for SGI
UV
* Mike Travis <travis@....com> wrote:
> On 9/24/2013 12:52 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > Hm, do you test-build your patches?
>
> Both build and test incessantly...
>
> This series produces the following
> > annoying warning:
> >
> > arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_nmi.c: In function ‘uv_nmi_setup’:
> > arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_nmi.c:664:2: warning: the address of ‘uv_nmi_cpu_mask’ will always evaluate as ‘true’ [-Waddress]
>
> I didn't hit the above warning since I never tried building without
> CONFIG_CPUMASK_OFFSTACK defined. [...]
Ok, that explains it!
> [...] I wonder if uv_nmi.c should not be built if not on an enterprise
> sized system?
I don't think so - the config variations help root out such bugs.
Thanks,
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