[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221130001834.GA552288@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2022 16:18:34 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: next-20221122: tinyconfig: ppc n s390:
kernel/printk/printk.c:95:1: error: type specifier missing, defaults to
'int'; ISO C99 and later do not support implicit int
[-Werror,-Wimplicit-int]
On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 03:42:22PM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 12:20:19AM +0106, John Ogness wrote:
> > On 2022-11-22, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > And here is a first cut. There will be more patches removing uses
> > > of CONFIG_SRCU.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> >
> > I am happy with it. Thanks!
> >
> > > rcu: Make SRCU mandatory
> > >
> > > Kernels configured with CONFIG_PRINTK=n and CONFIG_SRCU=n get build
> > > failures. This causes trouble for deep embedded systems. But given
> > > that there are more than 25 instances of "select SRCU" in the kernel,
> > > it is hard to believe that there are many kernels running in production
> > > without SRCU. This commit therefore makes SRCU mandatory. The SRCU
> > > Kconfig option remains for backwards compatibility, and will be removed
> > > when it is no longer used.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
> > > Reported-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>
>
> Applied both, and thank you both!
And this seems have avoided breaking things, so I moved it on top of the
earlier srcunmisafe.2022.11.09a stack with a new srcunmisafe.2022.11.29a
branch name.
If you need me to, I can push this into the upcoming merge window.
Or you could rebase on top of it, so that when the printk() series goes
in, this commit will come along for the ride.
Your choice, just let me know!
Thanx, Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists