[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53D86226.7020207@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 20:10:30 -0700
From: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the tip tree
On 07/29/2014 04:56 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2014 14:45:22 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
<sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> After merging the tip tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
>> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
>>
>> arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c:743:6: error: conflicting types for
'update_vsyscall_old'
>> void update_vsyscall_old(struct timespec *wall_time, struct timespec
*wtm,
>> ^
>> In file included from arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c:77:0:
>> include/linux/timekeeper_internal.h:114:13: note: previous
declaration of 'update_vsyscall_old' was here
>> extern void update_vsyscall_old(struct timespec *ts, struct timespec
*wtm,
>> ^
>>
>> Caused by commit 4a0e637738f0 ("clocksource: Get rid of cycle_last").
>>
>> I have used the tip tree from next-20140724 for today.
>
> Ping?
So I sent a fix for this the other day ([PATCH] timekeeping: Fixup typo
in update_vsyscall_old definition), but I've not heard anything from
anyone on it.
thanks
-john
--
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