From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org-S262707AbVCCWxp@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S262707AbVCCWxp (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Thu, 3 Mar 2005 17:53:45 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262678AbVCCWuZ
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Thu, 3 Mar 2005 17:50:25 -0500
Received: from mail.kroah.org ([69.55.234.183]:14022 "EHLO perch.kroah.org")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262712AbVCCWpf (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 3 Mar 2005 17:45:35 -0500
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2005 14:45:15 -0800
From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Cc: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>, Rene Rebe <rene@exactcode.de>,
       torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] trivial fix for 2.6.11 raid6 compilation on ppc w/ Altivec
Message-ID: <20050303224515.GA16567@kroah.com>
References: <422751D9.2060603@exactcode.de> <422756DC.6000405@pobox.com> <16935.36862.137151.499468@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <16935.36862.137151.499468@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 09:30:22AM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Jeff Garzik writes:
> > Rene Rebe wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --- linux-2.6.11/drivers/md/raid6altivec.uc.vanilla    2005-03-02 
> > > 16:44:56.407107752 +0100
> > > +++ linux-2.6.11/drivers/md/raid6altivec.uc    2005-03-02 
> > > 16:45:22.424152560 +0100
> > > @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@
> > >  int raid6_have_altivec(void)
> > >  {
> > >      /* This assumes either all CPUs have Altivec or none does */
> > > -    return cur_cpu_spec->cpu_features & CPU_FTR_ALTIVEC;
> > > +    return cur_cpu_spec[0]->cpu_features & CPU_FTR_ALTIVEC;
> > 
> > 
> > I nominate this as a candidate for linux-2.6.11 release branch.  :)
> 
> No.  Unfortunately if you fix ppc64 here you will break ppc, and vice
> versa.  Yes, we are going to reconcile the cur_cpu_spec definitions
> between ppc and ppc64. :)

Fine, dueling arches, who wins?  :)

So, what do I do, just ignore the patch?  Or do you have a fix?

thanks,

greg k-h