From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755153AbbGZIyn (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Jul 2015 04:54:43 -0400 Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:52989 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752467AbbGZIyl (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Jul 2015 04:54:41 -0400 Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2015 10:54:19 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Xunlei Pang cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Howells , Koichi Yasutake , linux-am33-list@redhat.com, Xunlei Pang , John Stultz , Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] time: Add the common weak version of update_persistent_clock() In-Reply-To: <1437875633-5715-1-git-send-email-xlpang@126.com> Message-ID: References: <1437875633-5715-1-git-send-email-xlpang@126.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (DEB 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 26 Jul 2015, Xunlei Pang wrote: > From: Xunlei Pang > > The weak update_persistent_clock64() calls update_persistent_clock(), > if the architecture defines a update_persistent_clock64() to replace > and remove its update_persistent_clock() version, the compiler will s/compiler/linker/ right? > throw an undefined symbol error, that is, any arch that switches to > update_persistent_clock64() will have this issue. > > So, we should add the common weak update_persistent_clock(). Are we adding it or should we add it? Thanks, tglx