From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e19.ny.us.ibm.com ([129.33.205.209]:37773 "EHLO e19.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964896AbbELXzo (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2015 19:55:44 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e19.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 12 May 2015 19:55:44 -0400 Received: from b01cxnp23033.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp23033.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.28]) by d01dlp02.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94B206E803F for ; Tue, 12 May 2015 19:47:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from d01av05.pok.ibm.com (d01av05.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.195]) by b01cxnp23033.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id t4CNtfOr60555382 for ; Tue, 12 May 2015 23:55:41 GMT Received: from d01av05.pok.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d01av05.pok.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id t4CNtesp000891 for ; Tue, 12 May 2015 19:55:41 -0400 Message-ID: <555292F9.10407@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 05:25:37 +0530 From: Preeti U Murthy MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Greg Kroah-Hartman CC: Guenter Roeck , stable , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: 4.0.2-stable-queue build failures due to 'clockevents: Fix cpu_down() race for hrtimer based broadcasting' References: <554FFEED.6030308@roeck-us.net> <55504319.9090501@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20150511130234.GA24321@roeck-us.net> <5551988D.4060002@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20150512121428.GA25401@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20150512121428.GA25401@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 05/12/2015 05:44 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:37:09AM +0530, Preeti U Murthy wrote: >> On 05/11/2015 06:32 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 11:20:17AM +0530, Preeti U Murthy wrote: >>>> On 05/11/2015 06:29 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>>>> Build is still going on, so there may be other affected architectures. >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> >>>>> Building ia64:defconfig ... failed >>>>> Building parisc:generic-32bit_defconfig ... failed >>>>> -------------- >>>>> Error log: >>>>> kernel/cpu.c: In function '_cpu_down': >>>>> kernel/cpu.c:415:2: error: implicit declaration of function >>>>> 'hotplug_cpu__broadcast_tick_pull' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] >>>>> cc1: some warnings being treated as errors >>>>> >>> [ ... ] >>> >>>>> git bisect good c20b6545f649724a733e008e7124fa9d1e114c71 >>>>> # first bad commit: [c71309a3658d323d56261d4590b2c5214e61b05f] >>>>> clockevents: Fix cpu_down() race for hrtimer based broadcasting >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> >>>>> Reverting the bad commit fixes the problem. >>>> >>>> Please let me know if the following patch fixes the issue: >>>> >>>> clockevents: Fix build error caused by fix for hotplug race with hrtimer broadcast >>>> >>>> commit: c71309a3658d ("clockevents: Fix cpu_down() race for hrtimer based broadcasting") >>>> causes a build error on certain archs where CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS >>>> is not set. This patch fixes this. >>>> >>>> +++ b/include/linux/tick.h >>>> @@ -134,6 +134,7 @@ static inline void tick_clock_notify(void) { } >>>> static inline int tick_check_oneshot_change(int allow_nohz) { return 0; } >>>> static inline void tick_irq_enter(void) { } >>>> static inline int tick_oneshot_mode_active(void) { return 0; } >>>> +static inline void hotplug_cpu__broadcast_tick_pull(int dead_cpu) { } >>> >>> Possibly it does, but why is the back-port so much different from the original >>> patch ? This would be the third declaration of this dummy function, which just >>> seems wrong. The original patch only needs one. >> >> That is because these two patches simplified the layout of the related >> files. >> >> c1797baf6880174: tick: Move core only declarations and functions to core >> b7475eb599ddb2e: tick: Simplify tick-internal.h >> >> These patches are not yet in stable. > > Then you should have asked for them to be merged as well. I don't want > to deviate from what is in Linus's tree if at all possible. This long > email exchange is the exact reason why (patch errors, build errors, > wasted time, confusion, etc.) > > Please resend me the exact git commit ids that you wish to have added to > the stable tree, in the order you wish to have them added. If something > needs to be changed/backported, be very explicit as to why it needs to > be changed, and that you have done so. Ok Greg, I will do so. I apologize for the confusion created. Regards Preeti U Murthy > > thanks, > > greg k-h >