From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: pawel.moll@arm.com (Pawel Moll) Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 16:08:03 +0100 Subject: Build failures in -next due to use of __hrtimer_start_range_ns arm-ccn.c In-Reply-To: <20150513145101.GU2761@sirena.org.uk> References: <20150513145101.GU2761@sirena.org.uk> Message-ID: <1431529683.3285.101.camel@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, 2015-05-13 at 15:51 +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 12:34:48PM +0100, Build bot for Mark Brown wrote: > > > arm64-allmodconfig > > ../drivers/bus/arm-ccn.c:924:3: error: implicit declaration of function '__hrtimer_start_range_ns' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > > > arm-allmodconfig > > ../drivers/bus/arm-ccn.c:924:3: error: implicit declaration of function '__hrtimer_start_range_ns' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > Today's -next fails to build both arm and arm64 allmodconfig due to the > above errors, introduced in commit ffa415245b8666c44d (bus: arm-ccn: > cpumask attribute). Judging from the name of the symbol it appears that > the code is peering into hrtimer implementation details and indeed it > was removed in commit 58f1f803f1d6ef9 (hrtimer: Get rid of > __hrtimer_start_range_ns()) which has a commit message suggsting that > this has indeed been explicitly removed and no new references should be > added. Right, the fix will be equivalent to 576b0704c9def6d54b3ae9e13b0b7567c713f568 "x86: perf: uncore: Use hrtimer_start()" http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=142904610220085 Will post it in a second, but not sure who should take it? The arm-soc guys, as an additional ccn patch, or Thomas as part of his series? Thanks for pointing this out! Pawel