[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <544FAC9F0200007800042CA6@mail.emea.novell.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 13:47:59 +0000
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@...e.com>
To: <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: <tglx@...utronix.de>, <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/urgent] ix86: Fix build failure when
!CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC
>>> On 28.10.14 at 12:18, <tipbot@...or.com> wrote:
> Commit-ID: a425cf83e39f99a70168c184e79cea8c67ba7c12
> Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/a425cf83e39f99a70168c184e79cea8c67ba7c12
> Author: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>
> AuthorDate: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 13:44:24 +0100
> Committer: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
> CommitDate: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 12:01:09 +0100
>
> ix86: Fix build failure when !CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC
>
> mp_should_keep_irq() isn't really IO-APIC related, and
> considering that it's being used solely in arch/x86/pci/ likely
> both declaration and definition got misplaced even without
> considering the resulting build failure:
>
> .../arch/x86/pci/irq.c: In function ‘pirq_disable_irq’:
> .../arch/x86/pci/irq.c:1259: error: implicit declaration of function
> ‘mp_should_keep_irq’
> make[3]: *** [arch/x86/pci/irq.o] Error 1
>
> Move them to better places.
Ingo,
the build failure had got addressed by a different patch already,
albeit that patch seems far from ideal to me. I.e. I still think cleanup
along the lines of the patch here is desirable, but I need to submit
one that actually builds (the build failure the test robot encountered
is a direct result of the clash between the two patches). I have that
patch ready, but didn't want to submit before I got around to test it
with 3.18-rc.
Jan
--
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