[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2290734.BRljGaICu4@wuerfel>
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 13:29:29 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: psci: Fix build breakage without PM_SLEEP
On Tuesday 09 December 2014 12:48:36 Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Fix build failure of defconfig when PM_SLEEP is disabled (e.g. by
> disabling SUSPEND) and CPU_IDLE enabled:
>
> arch/arm64/kernel/psci.c:543:2: error: unknown field ‘cpu_suspend’ specified in initializer
> .cpu_suspend = cpu_psci_cpu_suspend,
> ^
> arch/arm64/kernel/psci.c:543:2: warning: initialization from incompatible pointer type [enabled by default]
> arch/arm64/kernel/psci.c:543:2: warning: (near initialization for ‘cpu_psci_ops.cpu_prepare’) [enabled by default]
> make[1]: *** [arch/arm64/kernel/psci.o] Error 1
>
> The cpu_operations.cpu_suspend field exists only if ARM64_CPU_SUSPEND is
> defined, not CPU_IDLE.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>
>
No objection to fixing this obvious build bug, but why do we even have
an ARM64_CPU_SUSPEND option? On ARM32 we only have the respective option
because we have a random collection of platform specific drivers that
use the symbols, but that's not the case on ARM64.
Arnd
--
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