[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87ilc28ifp.ffs@tglx>
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2023 09:41:30 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86@...nel.org,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...ux.intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Arjan van de Veen <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 4/6] x86/smp: Cure kexec() vs. mwait_play_dead() breakage
On Sat, Jun 03 2023 at 20:19, Ashok Raj wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 03, 2023 at 10:07:01PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>
>> +void smp_kick_mwait_play_dead(void);
>> +
>
> This seems like its missing prototype for #else for !CONFIG_SMP
>
> #else /* !CONFIG_SMP */
> +#define smp_kick_mwait_play_dead(void) { }
Nope. The code which calls this is only compiled when SMP=y
Powered by blists - more mailing lists