From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755638AbaJ2HxK (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Oct 2014 03:53:10 -0400 Received: from mail.emea.novell.com ([130.57.118.101]:39537 "EHLO mail.emea.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752224AbaJ2HxJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Oct 2014 03:53:09 -0400 Message-Id: <5450AAF30200007800042F64@mail.emea.novell.com> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 14.0.1 Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 07:53:07 +0000 From: "Jan Beulich" To: "Ingo Molnar" Cc: , , , Subject: Re: [tip:x86/urgent] ix86: Fix build failure when !CONFIG_X86_IO_APIC References: <54184CC802000078000355EE@mail.emea.novell.com> <544FAC9F0200007800042CA6@mail.emea.novell.com> <20141029075042.GA7322@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20141029075042.GA7322@gmail.com> 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 29.10.14 at 08:50, wrote: > * Jan Beulich wrote: > >> >>> 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. > > 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 > ‘mp_should_keep_irq’ 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