From: peterz@infradead.org (Peter Zijlstra)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Build regression in next-20150331
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 10:29:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150402082917.GS23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2863807.lxHPvZ2AsE@vostro.rjw.lan>
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 11:46:10PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > ---
> > > kernel/time/tick-internal.h | 2 ++
> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > Index: linux-pm/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- linux-pm.orig/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
> > > +++ linux-pm/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
> > > @@ -110,7 +110,9 @@ static inline int tick_broadcast_update_
> > > /* Set the periodic handler in non broadcast mode */
> > > static inline void tick_set_periodic_handler(struct clock_event_device *dev, int broadcast)
> > > {
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
> > > dev->event_handler = tick_handle_periodic;
> > > +#endif
> > > }
> > > #endif /* !BROADCAST */
> Peter, do you think the above is acceptable or do I need to do anything more
> sophisticated to fix this? [The alternative would be probably to prepare an
> empty definition of tick_handle_periodic() for CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS and
> move the definition of struct clock_event_device from under that Kconfig
> option.]
Does not something like the below make more sense? The entire broadcast
thing doesn't make sense if we don't have generic_clockevents.
Should we wrap more in generic_clockevents there?
---
kernel/time/tick-internal.h | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-internal.h b/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
index 2a1563a..5569e65 100644
--- a/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
+++ b/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
@@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ static inline int tick_check_oneshot_change(int allow_nohz) { return 0; }
#endif /* !TICK_ONESHOT */
/* Broadcasting support */
+#ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
#ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BROADCAST
extern int tick_device_uses_broadcast(struct clock_event_device *dev, int cpu);
extern void tick_install_broadcast_device(struct clock_event_device *dev);
@@ -114,6 +115,7 @@ static inline void tick_set_periodic_handler(struct clock_event_device *dev, int
dev->event_handler = tick_handle_periodic;
}
#endif /* !BROADCAST */
+#endif /* GENERIC */
/* Functions related to oneshot broadcasting */
#if defined(CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BROADCAST) && defined(CONFIG_TICK_ONESHOT)
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Cc: Tyler Baker <tyler.baker@linaro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: Build regression in next-20150331
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2015 10:29:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150402082917.GS23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2863807.lxHPvZ2AsE@vostro.rjw.lan>
On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 11:46:10PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > ---
> > > kernel/time/tick-internal.h | 2 ++
> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > Index: linux-pm/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
> > > ===================================================================
> > > --- linux-pm.orig/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
> > > +++ linux-pm/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
> > > @@ -110,7 +110,9 @@ static inline int tick_broadcast_update_
> > > /* Set the periodic handler in non broadcast mode */
> > > static inline void tick_set_periodic_handler(struct clock_event_device *dev, int broadcast)
> > > {
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
> > > dev->event_handler = tick_handle_periodic;
> > > +#endif
> > > }
> > > #endif /* !BROADCAST */
> Peter, do you think the above is acceptable or do I need to do anything more
> sophisticated to fix this? [The alternative would be probably to prepare an
> empty definition of tick_handle_periodic() for CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS and
> move the definition of struct clock_event_device from under that Kconfig
> option.]
Does not something like the below make more sense? The entire broadcast
thing doesn't make sense if we don't have generic_clockevents.
Should we wrap more in generic_clockevents there?
---
kernel/time/tick-internal.h | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-internal.h b/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
index 2a1563a..5569e65 100644
--- a/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
+++ b/kernel/time/tick-internal.h
@@ -81,6 +81,7 @@ static inline int tick_check_oneshot_change(int allow_nohz) { return 0; }
#endif /* !TICK_ONESHOT */
/* Broadcasting support */
+#ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS
#ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BROADCAST
extern int tick_device_uses_broadcast(struct clock_event_device *dev, int cpu);
extern void tick_install_broadcast_device(struct clock_event_device *dev);
@@ -114,6 +115,7 @@ static inline void tick_set_periodic_handler(struct clock_event_device *dev, int
dev->event_handler = tick_handle_periodic;
}
#endif /* !BROADCAST */
+#endif /* GENERIC */
/* Functions related to oneshot broadcasting */
#if defined(CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BROADCAST) && defined(CONFIG_TICK_ONESHOT)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-04-02 8:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-03-31 18:39 Build regression in next-20150331 Tyler Baker
2015-03-31 18:39 ` Tyler Baker
2015-03-31 23:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-03-31 23:03 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-03-31 23:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-03-31 23:27 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-04-01 3:37 ` Tyler Baker
2015-04-01 3:37 ` Tyler Baker
2015-04-01 21:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-04-01 21:46 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-04-02 8:29 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-04-02 8:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-04-02 22:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-04-02 22:09 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-04-03 2:59 ` Tyler Baker
2015-04-03 2:59 ` Tyler Baker
2015-04-03 11:07 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-04-03 11:07 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-04-03 14:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-04-03 14:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-04-07 17:08 ` Tyler Baker
2015-04-07 17:08 ` Tyler Baker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150402082917.GS23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.