Re: [tip:x86/urgent] ix86: Fix build failure when !CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC

[Jan Beulich]

>>> On 29.10.14 at 08:50, <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> * Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> >>> On 28.10.14 at 12:18, <tipbot@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Commit-ID:  a425cf83e39f99a70168c184e79cea8c67ba7c12
>> > Gitweb:     
> http://git.kernel.org/tip/a425cf83e39f99a70168c184e79cea8c67ba7c12 
>> > Author:     Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>> > AuthorDate: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 13:44:24 +0100
>> > Committer:  Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > 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 âpirq_disable_irqâ:
>> >   .../arch/x86/pci/irq.c:1259: error: implicit declaration of function 
>> > âmp_should_keep_irqâ
>> >   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.
> 
> Okay, I've removed it from x86/urgent. Note that it also 
> generated this build failure:
> 
> ./arch/x86/include/asm/io_apic.h:240:20: error: static declaration of 
> âmp_should_keep_irqâ follows non-static declaration

Right - that's the one I was referring to above (actually iirc there
are two relatively similar build failures resulting from the conflict).

Jan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/