From: mstowe@redhat.com (Myron Stowe)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [BUG] Multiple definition of pcibios_max_latency
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 10:59:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1328551157.2264.11.camel@zim.stowe> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120204125904.GU889@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Sat, 2012-02-04 at 12:59 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> While building my test PXA configuration, I came across:
>
> drivers/built-in.o:(.data+0x230): multiple definition of `pcibios_max_latency'
> arch/arm/common/built-in.o:(.data+0x40c): first defined here
> make[1]: *** [vmlinux.o] Error 1
>
> This was introduced by:
>
> commit 96c5590058d7fded14f43af2ab521436cecf3125
> Author: Myron Stowe <mstowe@redhat.com>
> Date: Fri Oct 28 15:48:38 2011 -0600
>
> PCI: Pull PCI 'latency timer' setup up into the core
>
> The 'latency timer' of PCI devices, both Type 0 and Type 1,
> is setup in architecture-specific code [see: 'pcibios_set_master()'].
> There are two approaches being taken by all the architectures - check
> if the 'latency timer' is currently set between 16 and 255 and if not
> bring it within bounds, or, do nothing (and then there is the
> gratuitously different PA-RISC implementation).
>
> There is nothing architecture-specific about PCI's 'latency timer' so
> this patch pulls its setup functionality up into the PCI core by
> creating a generic 'pcibios_set_master()' function using the '__weak'
> attribute which can be used by all architectures as a default which,
> if necessary, can then be over-ridden by architecture-specific code.
>
> No functional change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
>
> which moved the handling of pcibios_set_master() into core code for
> everyone but ARM:
>
> arch/blackfin/include/asm/pci.h | 4 ----
> arch/frv/mb93090-mb00/pci-frv.c | 6 ------
> arch/frv/mb93090-mb00/pci-frv.h | 2 --
> arch/h8300/include/asm/pci.h | 5 -----
> arch/mips/pci/pci.c | 6 ------
> arch/mn10300/unit-asb2305/pci-asb2305.c | 6 ------
> arch/mn10300/unit-asb2305/pci-asb2305.h | 2 --
> arch/sh/drivers/pci/pci.c | 6 ------
> arch/x86/include/asm/pci_x86.h | 2 --
> arch/x86/pci/i386.c | 6 ------
> drivers/pci/pci.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/pci.h | 3 +++
> 12 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
>
> I think the right solution is to delete the (now duplicate) definition
> of pcibios_max_latency in arch/arm/common/it8152.c. Please comment.
Yes, that commit is the culprit. I was concerned about ARM in general
when I posted this series as I do not have a compile environment for it,
nor am I at all familiar with ARM to know if I had covered all the
possible variations (i.e. 8152 vs other, non 8152 types).
Will deleting the 'pcibios_max_latency' definition in
arch/arm/common/it8152.c be the correct solution for all ARM variations
(I don't want to try and fix one while breaking others)?
I'll wait for your response/guidance and if this is the correct action
generate a patch right away.
Thanks,
Myron
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-06 17:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-04 12:59 [BUG] Multiple definition of pcibios_max_latency Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-02-06 17:59 ` Myron Stowe [this message]
2012-02-07 8:58 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-02-07 22:26 ` Myron Stowe
2012-02-12 10:45 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
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=1328551157.2264.11.camel@zim.stowe \
--to=mstowe@redhat.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).