From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752631AbaJ1NsJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:48:09 -0400 Received: from mail.emea.novell.com ([130.57.118.101]:49409 "EHLO mail.emea.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750958AbaJ1NsH (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:48:07 -0400 Message-Id: <544FAC9F0200007800042CA6@mail.emea.novell.com> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.0.1 Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 13:47:59 +0000 From: "Jan Beulich" To: Cc: , , , Subject: Re: [tip:x86/urgent] ix86: Fix build failure when !CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC References: <54184CC802000078000355EE@mail.emea.novell.com> In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>> On 28.10.14 at 12:18, wrote: > Commit-ID: a425cf83e39f99a70168c184e79cea8c67ba7c12 > Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/a425cf83e39f99a70168c184e79cea8c67ba7c12 > Author: Jan Beulich > AuthorDate: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 13:44:24 +0100 > Committer: Ingo Molnar > 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 ‘pirq_disable_irq’: > .../arch/x86/pci/irq.c:1259: error: implicit declaration of function > ‘mp_should_keep_irq’ > 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. Jan