Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 25 Sep 2007 09:52:29 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/1] Kernel compile bug in 2.6.22.6/7 {maybe more} ARM/StrongARM |
| |
On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 10:36:51 -0400 Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 08:31:32AM +0100, Russell King wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 05:53:57PM -0500, Greg.Chandler@wellsfargo.com wrote: > > > I was building a kernel for an iPaq {SA1110} and ran into this. > > > > > > linux-2.6.22.7/arch/arm/mach-sa1100/generic.c: > > > Has a: #include <linux/cpufreq.h> > > > Then afterwards there is a: #if defined(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_SA1100) || > > > defined(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_SA1110) > > > who's else section redefines the cpufreq_get function inhereited from > > > the header.... > > > > > > I'm guessing no one ever ended up in the "else" section until now, and > > > that the header was added some time ago and no one caught this. > > > This patch worked for me to get rid of the compile time problems. I'm > > > having issues with the kernel, but as far as I can tell they are form > > > the Frame buffer and not because of this. If this assessment is correct > > > {the not needing this code anymore} then please pass this along so it > > > makes it into an upcoming release. > > > > > > --- linux-2.6.22.7/arch/arm/mach-sa1100/generic.c.orig 2007-09-24 > > > 17:36:21.000000000 -0500 > > > +++ linux-2.6.22.7/arch/arm/mach-sa1100/generic.c 2007-09-24 > > > 17:40:02.000000000 -0500 > > > @@ -107,15 +107,6 @@ unsigned int sa11x0_getspeed(unsigned in > > > return cclk_frequency_100khz[PPCR & 0xf] * 100; > > > } > > > > > > -#else > > > -/* > > > - * We still need to provide this so building without cpufreq works. > > > - */ > > > -unsigned int cpufreq_get(unsigned int cpu) > > > -{ > > > - return cclk_frequency_100khz[PPCR & 0xf] * 100; > > > -} > > > -EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpufreq_get); > > > #endif > > > > > > /* > > > > No. That code is required - the StrongARM 1100 framebuffer driver > > *needs* to know what the CPU frequency is so it can set the pixel > > clock divisor. > > > > The real problem is the silly people who added this to cpufreq.h: > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ > > unsigned int cpufreq_quick_get(unsigned int cpu); > > unsigned int cpufreq_get(unsigned int cpu); > > #else > > static inline unsigned int cpufreq_quick_get(unsigned int cpu) > > { > > return 0; > > } > > static inline unsigned int cpufreq_get(unsigned int cpu) > > { > > return 0; > > } > > #endif > > > > which utterly bogus. > > Which came from ... > > commit 184c44d2049c4db7ef6ec65794546954da2c6a0e > Author: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> > Date: Wed May 2 19:27:08 2007 +0200 > > [PATCH] x86-64: fix x86_64-mm-sched-clock-share > > Fix for the following patch. Provide dummy cpufreq functions when > CPUFREQ is not compiled in. > > Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> > Cc: Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> > > I don't remember seeing any problem here, so I'm not entirely sure what > this was supposed to be fixing. Perhaps the -mm-esque patch name > will provide Andrew/Andi clues. It lacks sufficient information for > my brain to guess what the problem was.
Oh geeze. sched-clock-share went through about 18 different versions, was merged, unmerged, remerged, dropped, etc. I don't recall at what stage in this mess the above fix was inserted, sorry.
> "Fix for the following patch" is also something that really should > never be added to a git changelog too, because 'next' means absolutely > nothing to me, nor I expect 99% of changelog readers.
184c44d2049c4db7ef6ec65794546954da2c6a0e should never have existed, actually. I intended that Andi fold it into the base patch prior to sending it to Linus. He normally does that, but it looks like this one was handled as a standalone commit for some reason.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |