From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758244Ab0IZVTl (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Sep 2010 17:19:41 -0400 Received: from www17.your-server.de ([213.133.104.17]:39963 "EHLO www17.your-server.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758206Ab0IZVTj (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Sep 2010 17:19:39 -0400 From: Thomas Meyer To: Linux Kernel Mailing List , jbeulich@novell.com, r.marek@assembler.cz, guenter.roeck@ericsson.com Subject: 2.6.36-rc5+: drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c:506: error: implicit declaration of function 'cpu_sibling_mask' Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 23:17:50 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.36-rc5; KDE/4.4.5; i686; ; ) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201009262317.50500.thomas@m3y3r.de> X-Authenticated-Sender: thomas@m3y3r.de Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org $ make V=2 CHK include/linux/version.h CHK include/generated/utsrelease.h CALL scripts/checksyscalls.sh - due to target is PHONY CHK include/generated/compile.h CC [M] drivers/hwmon/coretemp.o - due to target missing drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c: In function 'coretemp_device_remove': drivers/hwmon/coretemp.c:506: error: implicit declaration of function 'cpu_sibling_mask' make[2]: *** [drivers/hwmon/coretemp.o] Error 1 make[1]: *** [drivers/hwmon] Error 2 make: *** [drivers] Error 2 above function is not defined on UP. This commit introduced the error: commit e40cc4bdfd4b89813f072f72bd9c7055814d3f0f Author: Jan Beulich Date: Mon Sep 13 10:23:05 2010 +0000 x86/hwmon: register alternate sibling upon CPU removal Just like pkgtemp registers another core of the same package when one gets removed, coretemp should register another hyperthread (if available) in that situation. As pointed out in the patch fixing the respective code in pkgtemp, the list protectng mutex must be dropped before calling coretemp_device_add(), and due to the restructured loop (including an explicit return) the "safe" variant of the list iterator isn't needed anymore. Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Cc: Rudolf Marek Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck