* Re: sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ [not found] <496D4274.6000304@earthlink.net> @ 2009-01-14 2:10 ` David Miller 2009-01-14 2:42 ` Andrew Morton 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: David Miller @ 2009-01-14 2:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: reif; +Cc: sparclinux-owner, akpm, mingo, linux-kernel [-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --] [-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain; charset=utf-8, Size: 1586 bytes --] From: Robert Reif <reif@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 20:40:04 -0500 > Todays git produces this compile error on sparc32: > > kernel/up.c:10: error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ > /usr/src/sparc32/linux-2.6/arch/sparc/include/asm/smp_32.h:78: error: previous definition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ was here Andrew, are you sure that Makefile condition for compiling up.o is correct? ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) obj-y += smp.o else obj-y += up.o endif If an arch doesn't use generic SMP helpers, there is no way we should compile up.c into the tree when SMP. This build regression was caused by: commit 53ce3d9564908794ae7dd32969089b57df5fc098 Author: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Date: Fri Jan 9 12:27:08 2009 -0800 smp_call_function_single(): be slightly less stupid If you do smp_call_function_single(expression-with-side-effects, ...) then expression-with-side-effects never gets evaluated on UP builds. As always, implementing it in C is the correct thing to do. While we're there, uninline it for size and possible header dependency reasons. And create a new kernel/up.c, as a place in which to put uniprocessor-specific code and storage. It should mirror kernel/smp.c. Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> ÿôèº{.nÇ+‰·Ÿ®‰†+%ŠËÿ±éݶ\x17¥Šwÿº{.nÇ+‰·¥Š{±þG«éÿŠ{ayº\x1dʇڙë,j\a¢f£¢·hšïêÿ‘êçz_è®\x03(階ŠÝ¢j"ú\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿ¾\a«þG«éÿ¢¸?™¨èÚ&£ø§~á¶iO•æ¬z·švØ^\x14\x04\x1a¶^[m§ÿÿÃ\fÿ¶ìÿ¢¸?–I¥ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ 2009-01-14 2:10 ` sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ David Miller @ 2009-01-14 2:42 ` Andrew Morton 2009-01-14 2:45 ` Andrew Morton 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2009-01-14 2:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Miller; +Cc: reif, sparclinux-owner, mingo, linux-kernel On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:10:39 -0800 (PST) David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote: > From: Robert Reif <reif@earthlink.net> > Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 20:40:04 -0500 > > > Todays git produces this compile error on sparc32: > > > > kernel/up.c:10: error: redefinition of ___smp_call_function_single___ > > /usr/src/sparc32/linux-2.6/arch/sparc/include/asm/smp_32.h:78: error: previous definition of ___smp_call_function_single___ was here > > Andrew, are you sure that Makefile condition for compiling > up.o is correct? you give me grounds for now being ;) > ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) > obj-y += smp.o > else > obj-y += up.o > endif > > If an arch doesn't use generic SMP helpers, there is no way > we should compile up.c into the tree when SMP. > How's about this? --- a/kernel/Makefile~a +++ a/kernel/Makefile @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) obj-y += smp.o else -obj-y += up.o +obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += up.o endif obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock.o _ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ 2009-01-14 2:42 ` Andrew Morton @ 2009-01-14 2:45 ` Andrew Morton 2009-01-14 3:38 ` sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ Robert Reif 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2009-01-14 2:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Miller, reif, sparclinux-owner, mingo, linux-kernel On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:42:39 -0800 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:10:39 -0800 (PST) David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote: > > > From: Robert Reif <reif@earthlink.net> > > Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 20:40:04 -0500 > > > > > Todays git produces this compile error on sparc32: > > > > > > kernel/up.c:10: error: redefinition of ___smp_call_function_single___ > > > /usr/src/sparc32/linux-2.6/arch/sparc/include/asm/smp_32.h:78: error: previous definition of ___smp_call_function_single___ was here > > > > Andrew, are you sure that Makefile condition for compiling > > up.o is correct? > > you give me grounds for now being ;) > > > ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) > > obj-y += smp.o > > else > > obj-y += up.o > > endif > > > > If an arch doesn't use generic SMP helpers, there is no way > > we should compile up.c into the tree when SMP. > > > > How's about this? > > --- a/kernel/Makefile~a > +++ a/kernel/Makefile > @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o > ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) > obj-y += smp.o > else > -obj-y += up.o > +obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += up.o > endif > obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o > obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock.o err, the other way of course... --- a/kernel/Makefile~a +++ a/kernel/Makefile @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) obj-y += smp.o else +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) obj-y += up.o endif obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o _ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: sparc32 compile error: redefini 2009-01-14 2:45 ` Andrew Morton @ 2009-01-14 3:38 ` Robert Reif 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Robert Reif @ 2009-01-14 3:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton Cc: David Miller, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, mingo, linux-kernel Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:42:39 -0800 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > >> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:10:39 -0800 (PST) David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote: >> >> >>> From: Robert Reif <reif@earthlink.net> >>> Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 20:40:04 -0500 >>> >>> >>>> Todays git produces this compile error on sparc32: >>>> >>>> kernel/up.c:10: error: redefinition of ___smp_call_function_single___ >>>> /usr/src/sparc32/linux-2.6/arch/sparc/include/asm/smp_32.h:78: error: previous definition of ___smp_call_function_single___ was here >>>> >>> Andrew, are you sure that Makefile condition for compiling >>> up.o is correct? >>> >> you give me grounds for now being ;) >> >> >>> ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) >>> obj-y += smp.o >>> else >>> obj-y += up.o >>> endif >>> >>> If an arch doesn't use generic SMP helpers, there is no way >>> we should compile up.c into the tree when SMP. >>> >>> >> How's about this? >> >> --- a/kernel/Makefile~a >> +++ a/kernel/Makefile >> @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o >> ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) >> obj-y += smp.o >> else >> -obj-y += up.o >> +obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += up.o >> endif >> obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o >> obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock.o >> > > err, the other way of course... > > --- a/kernel/Makefile~a > +++ a/kernel/Makefile > @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o > ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) > obj-y += smp.o > else > +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > obj-y += up.o > endif > obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o > _ > > > > This worked: diff --git a/kernel/Makefile b/kernel/Makefile index 2aebc4c..368227d 100644 --- a/kernel/Makefile +++ b/kernel/Makefile @@ -43,8 +43,10 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) obj-y += smp.o else +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) obj-y += up.o endif +endif obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock.o obj-$(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING) += spinlock.o ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ @ 2009-01-14 3:38 ` Robert Reif 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Robert Reif @ 2009-01-14 3:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton Cc: David Miller, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, mingo, linux-kernel Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:42:39 -0800 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > >> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:10:39 -0800 (PST) David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote: >> >> >>> From: Robert Reif <reif@earthlink.net> >>> Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 20:40:04 -0500 >>> >>> >>>> Todays git produces this compile error on sparc32: >>>> >>>> kernel/up.c:10: error: redefinition of ___smp_call_function_single___ >>>> /usr/src/sparc32/linux-2.6/arch/sparc/include/asm/smp_32.h:78: error: previous definition of ___smp_call_function_single___ was here >>>> >>> Andrew, are you sure that Makefile condition for compiling >>> up.o is correct? >>> >> you give me grounds for now being ;) >> >> >>> ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) >>> obj-y += smp.o >>> else >>> obj-y += up.o >>> endif >>> >>> If an arch doesn't use generic SMP helpers, there is no way >>> we should compile up.c into the tree when SMP. >>> >>> >> How's about this? >> >> --- a/kernel/Makefile~a >> +++ a/kernel/Makefile >> @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o >> ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) >> obj-y += smp.o >> else >> -obj-y += up.o >> +obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += up.o >> endif >> obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o >> obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock.o >> > > err, the other way of course... > > --- a/kernel/Makefile~a > +++ a/kernel/Makefile > @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o > ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) > obj-y += smp.o > else > +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > obj-y += up.o > endif > obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o > _ > > > > This worked: diff --git a/kernel/Makefile b/kernel/Makefile index 2aebc4c..368227d 100644 --- a/kernel/Makefile +++ b/kernel/Makefile @@ -43,8 +43,10 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) obj-y += smp.o else +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) obj-y += up.o endif +endif obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock.o obj-$(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING) += spinlock.o ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp 2009-01-14 3:38 ` sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ Robert Reif @ 2009-01-14 7:59 ` Andrew Morton -1 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2009-01-14 7:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Robert Reif; +Cc: David Miller, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, mingo, linux-kernel On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:38:01 -0500 Robert Reif <reif@earthlink.net> wrote: > This worked: > > diff --git a/kernel/Makefile b/kernel/Makefile > index 2aebc4c..368227d 100644 > --- a/kernel/Makefile > +++ b/kernel/Makefile > @@ -43,8 +43,10 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o > ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) > obj-y += smp.o > else > +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > obj-y += up.o > endif > +endif > obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o > obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock.o > obj-$(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING) += spinlock.o This all can be simplified, can't it? obj-$(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS) += smp.o ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) obj-y += up.o endif (someone please check my homework - I don't have a good track record here ;)) --- a/kernel/Makefile~kernel-upc-omit-it-if-smp=y-use_generic_smp_helpers=n +++ a/kernel/Makefile @@ -40,9 +40,8 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_RT_MUTEXES) += rtmutex.o obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES) += rtmutex-debug.o obj-$(CONFIG_RT_MUTEX_TESTER) += rtmutex-tester.o obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o -ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) -obj-y += smp.o -else +obj-$(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS) += smp.o +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) obj-y += up.o endif obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o _ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ @ 2009-01-14 7:59 ` Andrew Morton 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2009-01-14 7:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Robert Reif; +Cc: David Miller, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, mingo, linux-kernel On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:38:01 -0500 Robert Reif <reif@earthlink.net> wrote: > This worked: > > diff --git a/kernel/Makefile b/kernel/Makefile > index 2aebc4c..368227d 100644 > --- a/kernel/Makefile > +++ b/kernel/Makefile > @@ -43,8 +43,10 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o > ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) > obj-y += smp.o > else > +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > obj-y += up.o > endif > +endif > obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o > obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock.o > obj-$(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING) += spinlock.o This all can be simplified, can't it? obj-$(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS) += smp.o ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) obj-y += up.o endif (someone please check my homework - I don't have a good track record here ;)) --- a/kernel/Makefile~kernel-upc-omit-it-if-smp=y-use_generic_smp_helpers=n +++ a/kernel/Makefile @@ -40,9 +40,8 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_RT_MUTEXES) += rtmutex.o obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES) += rtmutex-debug.o obj-$(CONFIG_RT_MUTEX_TESTER) += rtmutex-tester.o obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o -ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) -obj-y += smp.o -else +obj-$(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS) += smp.o +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) obj-y += up.o endif obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o _ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: sparc32 compile error: redef 2009-01-14 7:59 ` sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ Andrew Morton @ 2009-01-14 15:32 ` Sam Ravnborg -1 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Sam Ravnborg @ 2009-01-14 15:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton Cc: Robert Reif, David Miller, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, mingo, linux-kernel On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 11:59:40PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:38:01 -0500 Robert Reif <reif@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > This worked: > > > > diff --git a/kernel/Makefile b/kernel/Makefile > > index 2aebc4c..368227d 100644 > > --- a/kernel/Makefile > > +++ b/kernel/Makefile > > @@ -43,8 +43,10 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o > > ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) > > obj-y += smp.o > > else > > +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > > obj-y += up.o > > endif > > +endif > > obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING) += spinlock.o > > This all can be simplified, can't it? > > obj-$(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS) += smp.o > ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > obj-y += up.o > endif > > (someone please check my homework - I don't have a good track > record here ;)) Looks correct. We pull in smp.o only for SPARC64 AND SMP But I find the next lines distastefull in a Makefile: > ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > obj-y += up.o > endif I would prefer a small Kconfig helper symbol: config SPARC_UP def_bool y depends on !SMP And then we would do the Makefile bits like this: obj-$(CONFIG_SPARC_UP) += up.o So maybe a bit more involved patch - but more readable IMO. Robert - can I ask you to fix it up if you and others agree. Thanks, Sam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ @ 2009-01-14 15:32 ` Sam Ravnborg 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Sam Ravnborg @ 2009-01-14 15:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton Cc: Robert Reif, David Miller, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, mingo, linux-kernel On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 11:59:40PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:38:01 -0500 Robert Reif <reif@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > This worked: > > > > diff --git a/kernel/Makefile b/kernel/Makefile > > index 2aebc4c..368227d 100644 > > --- a/kernel/Makefile > > +++ b/kernel/Makefile > > @@ -43,8 +43,10 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o > > ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) > > obj-y += smp.o > > else > > +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > > obj-y += up.o > > endif > > +endif > > obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock.o > > obj-$(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING) += spinlock.o > > This all can be simplified, can't it? > > obj-$(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS) += smp.o > ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > obj-y += up.o > endif > > (someone please check my homework - I don't have a good track > record here ;)) Looks correct. We pull in smp.o only for SPARC64 AND SMP But I find the next lines distastefull in a Makefile: > ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > obj-y += up.o > endif I would prefer a small Kconfig helper symbol: config SPARC_UP def_bool y depends on !SMP And then we would do the Makefile bits like this: obj-$(CONFIG_SPARC_UP) += up.o So maybe a bit more involved patch - but more readable IMO. Robert - can I ask you to fix it up if you and others agree. Thanks, Sam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp 2009-01-14 15:32 ` sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ Sam Ravnborg @ 2009-01-14 18:25 ` Andrew Morton -1 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2009-01-14 18:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sam Ravnborg Cc: Robert Reif, David Miller, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, mingo, linux-kernel On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:32:55 +0100 Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 11:59:40PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:38:01 -0500 Robert Reif <reif@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > > > This worked: > > > > > > diff --git a/kernel/Makefile b/kernel/Makefile > > > index 2aebc4c..368227d 100644 > > > --- a/kernel/Makefile > > > +++ b/kernel/Makefile > > > @@ -43,8 +43,10 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o > > > ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) > > > obj-y += smp.o > > > else > > > +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > > > obj-y += up.o > > > endif > > > +endif > > > obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o > > > obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock.o > > > obj-$(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING) += spinlock.o > > > > This all can be simplified, can't it? > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS) += smp.o > > ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > > obj-y += up.o > > endif > > > > (someone please check my homework - I don't have a good track > > record here ;)) > > Looks correct. We pull in smp.o only for SPARC64 AND SMP SPARC64=n and SMP, actually (assuming sparc64 is the only USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS=n arch) > But I find the next lines distastefull in a Makefile: > > ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > > obj-y += up.o > > endif me too. > I would prefer a small Kconfig helper symbol: > > config SPARC_UP > def_bool y > depends on !SMP > > And then we would do the Makefile bits like this: > obj-$(CONFIG_SPARC_UP) += up.o eek. Mentioning sparc explicitly in kernel/Makefile is badder. we could remove zillions of these conditionals if something somewhere were to generate negated symbols for us. Say, when kbuild sees CONFIG_SMP=y, it will generate another symbol: NOT_CONFIG_SMP=y. So then we can do obj-$NOT_CONFIG_SMP += up.o Or is that too cheesy? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ @ 2009-01-14 18:25 ` Andrew Morton 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2009-01-14 18:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Sam Ravnborg Cc: Robert Reif, David Miller, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, mingo, linux-kernel On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:32:55 +0100 Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 11:59:40PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:38:01 -0500 Robert Reif <reif@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > > > This worked: > > > > > > diff --git a/kernel/Makefile b/kernel/Makefile > > > index 2aebc4c..368227d 100644 > > > --- a/kernel/Makefile > > > +++ b/kernel/Makefile > > > @@ -43,8 +43,10 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o > > > ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) > > > obj-y += smp.o > > > else > > > +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > > > obj-y += up.o > > > endif > > > +endif > > > obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o > > > obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock.o > > > obj-$(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING) += spinlock.o > > > > This all can be simplified, can't it? > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS) += smp.o > > ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > > obj-y += up.o > > endif > > > > (someone please check my homework - I don't have a good track > > record here ;)) > > Looks correct. We pull in smp.o only for SPARC64 AND SMP SPARC64=n and SMP, actually (assuming sparc64 is the only USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS=n arch) > But I find the next lines distastefull in a Makefile: > > ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > > obj-y += up.o > > endif me too. > I would prefer a small Kconfig helper symbol: > > config SPARC_UP > def_bool y > depends on !SMP > > And then we would do the Makefile bits like this: > obj-$(CONFIG_SPARC_UP) += up.o eek. Mentioning sparc explicitly in kernel/Makefile is badder. we could remove zillions of these conditionals if something somewhere were to generate negated symbols for us. Say, when kbuild sees CONFIG_SMP=y, it will generate another symbol: NOT_CONFIG_SMP=y. So then we can do obj-$NOT_CONFIG_SMP += up.o Or is that too cheesy? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: sparc32 compile error: redef 2009-01-14 18:25 ` sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ Andrew Morton @ 2009-01-14 20:08 ` Sam Ravnborg -1 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Sam Ravnborg @ 2009-01-14 20:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton Cc: Robert Reif, David Miller, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, mingo, linux-kernel On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:25:44AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:32:55 +0100 Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 11:59:40PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:38:01 -0500 Robert Reif <reif@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > > > > > This worked: > > > > > > > > diff --git a/kernel/Makefile b/kernel/Makefile > > > > index 2aebc4c..368227d 100644 > > > > --- a/kernel/Makefile > > > > +++ b/kernel/Makefile > > > > @@ -43,8 +43,10 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o > > > > ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) > > > > obj-y += smp.o > > > > else > > > > +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > > > > obj-y += up.o > > > > endif > > > > +endif > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock.o > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING) += spinlock.o > > > > > > This all can be simplified, can't it? > > > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS) += smp.o > > > ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > > > obj-y += up.o > > > endif > > > > > > (someone please check my homework - I don't have a good track > > > record here ;)) > > > > Looks correct. We pull in smp.o only for SPARC64 AND SMP > > SPARC64=n and SMP, actually (assuming sparc64 is the only > USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS=n arch) > > > But I find the next lines distastefull in a Makefile: > > > ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > > > obj-y += up.o > > > endif > > me too. > > > I would prefer a small Kconfig helper symbol: > > > > config SPARC_UP > > def_bool y > > depends on !SMP > > > > And then we would do the Makefile bits like this: > > obj-$(CONFIG_SPARC_UP) += up.o > > eek. Mentioning sparc explicitly in kernel/Makefile is badder. Ups - I my horry I did not notice this was _taht_ kernel/Makefile. > > we could remove zillions of these conditionals if something somewhere > were to generate negated symbols for us. Say, when kbuild sees > CONFIG_SMP=y, it will generate another symbol: NOT_CONFIG_SMP=y. So > then we can do > > obj-$NOT_CONFIG_SMP += up.o > > Or is that too cheesy? If we can remove a zillion lines - then no. But maybe the actual figure is a bit less :-) Sam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ @ 2009-01-14 20:08 ` Sam Ravnborg 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Sam Ravnborg @ 2009-01-14 20:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton Cc: Robert Reif, David Miller, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, mingo, linux-kernel On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:25:44AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:32:55 +0100 Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 11:59:40PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 22:38:01 -0500 Robert Reif <reif@earthlink.net> wrote: > > > > > > > This worked: > > > > > > > > diff --git a/kernel/Makefile b/kernel/Makefile > > > > index 2aebc4c..368227d 100644 > > > > --- a/kernel/Makefile > > > > +++ b/kernel/Makefile > > > > @@ -43,8 +43,10 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_ISA_DMA) += dma.o > > > > ifeq ($(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS),y) > > > > obj-y += smp.o > > > > else > > > > +ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > > > > obj-y += up.o > > > > endif > > > > +endif > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += spinlock.o > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK) += spinlock.o > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING) += spinlock.o > > > > > > This all can be simplified, can't it? > > > > > > obj-$(CONFIG_USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS) += smp.o > > > ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > > > obj-y += up.o > > > endif > > > > > > (someone please check my homework - I don't have a good track > > > record here ;)) > > > > Looks correct. We pull in smp.o only for SPARC64 AND SMP > > SPARC64=n and SMP, actually (assuming sparc64 is the only > USE_GENERIC_SMP_HELPERS=n arch) > > > But I find the next lines distastefull in a Makefile: > > > ifneq ($(CONFIG_SMP),y) > > > obj-y += up.o > > > endif > > me too. > > > I would prefer a small Kconfig helper symbol: > > > > config SPARC_UP > > def_bool y > > depends on !SMP > > > > And then we would do the Makefile bits like this: > > obj-$(CONFIG_SPARC_UP) += up.o > > eek. Mentioning sparc explicitly in kernel/Makefile is badder. Ups - I my horry I did not notice this was _taht_ kernel/Makefile. > > we could remove zillions of these conditionals if something somewhere > were to generate negated symbols for us. Say, when kbuild sees > CONFIG_SMP=y, it will generate another symbol: NOT_CONFIG_SMP=y. So > then we can do > > obj-$NOT_CONFIG_SMP += up.o > > Or is that too cheesy? If we can remove a zillion lines - then no. But maybe the actual figure is a bit less :-) Sam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-01-14 20:08 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <496D4274.6000304@earthlink.net>
2009-01-14 2:10 ` sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ David Miller
2009-01-14 2:42 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-14 2:45 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-14 3:38 ` sparc32 compile error: redefini Robert Reif
2009-01-14 3:38 ` sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ Robert Reif
2009-01-14 7:59 ` sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp Andrew Morton
2009-01-14 7:59 ` sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ Andrew Morton
2009-01-14 15:32 ` sparc32 compile error: redef Sam Ravnborg
2009-01-14 15:32 ` sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ Sam Ravnborg
2009-01-14 18:25 ` sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp Andrew Morton
2009-01-14 18:25 ` sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ Andrew Morton
2009-01-14 20:08 ` sparc32 compile error: redef Sam Ravnborg
2009-01-14 20:08 ` sparc32 compile error: redefinition of ‘smp_call_function_single’ Sam Ravnborg
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.