linux-kernel - Re: Build regression in next-20150331

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-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1674706.RfQn8UcQXL@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date:	Fri, 03 Apr 2015 00:09:07 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Tyler Baker <tyler.baker@...aro.org>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com,
	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: Build regression in next-20150331

On Thursday, April 02, 2015 10:29:17 AM Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 11:46:10PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> > > > ---
> > > >  kernel/time/tick-internal.h |    2 ++
> > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > Index: linux-pm/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
> > > > ===================================================================
> > > > --- linux-pm.orig/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
> > > > +++ linux-pm/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
> > > > @@ -110,7 +110,9 @@ static inline int tick_broadcast_update_
> > > >  /* Set the periodic handler in non broadcast mode */
> > > >  static inline void tick_set_periodic_handler(struct clock_event_device *dev, int broadcast)
> > > >  {
> > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
> > > >         dev->event_handler = tick_handle_periodic;
> > > > +#endif
> > > >  }
> > > >  #endif /* !BROADCAST */
> 
> > Peter, do you think the above is acceptable or do I need to do anything more
> > sophisticated to fix this?  [The alternative would be probably to prepare an
> > empty definition of tick_handle_periodic() for CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS and
> > move the definition of struct clock_event_device from under that Kconfig
> > option.]
> 
> 
> Does not something like the below make more sense? The entire broadcast
> thing doesn't make sense if we don't have generic_clockevents.
> 
> Should we wrap more in generic_clockevents there?

Well, it does make sense, but does it work?

Tyler, can you please test the Peter's patch too?

> ---
>  kernel/time/tick-internal.h |    2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-internal.h b/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
> index 2a1563a..5569e65 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
> @@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ static inline int tick_check_oneshot_change(int allow_nohz) { return 0; }
>  #endif /* !TICK_ONESHOT */
>  
>  /* Broadcasting support */
> +#ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
>  #ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BROADCAST
>  extern int tick_device_uses_broadcast(struct clock_event_device *dev, int cpu);
>  extern void tick_install_broadcast_device(struct clock_event_device *dev);
> @@ -114,6 +115,7 @@ static inline void tick_set_periodic_handler(struct clock_event_device *dev, int
>  	dev->event_handler = tick_handle_periodic;
>  }
>  #endif /* !BROADCAST */
> +#endif /* GENERIC */
>  
>  /* Functions related to oneshot broadcasting */
>  #if defined(CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BROADCAST) && defined(CONFIG_TICK_ONESHOT)

-- 
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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/