From: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>, linux-next@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: cpufreq tree build failure
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 10:47:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200902051047.56609.trenn@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090205185420.38214a06.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
On Thursday 05 February 2009 08:54:20 Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> Today's linux-next build (powerpc allyesconfig) failed like this:
>
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.o: In function `minimum_sampling_rate':
> (.opd+0x30): multiple definition of `minimum_sampling_rate'
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.o:(.opd+0x18): first defined here
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.o: In function `minimum_sampling_rate':
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_conservative.c:64: multiple definition of
`.minimum_sampling_rate'
> drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.o:drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_ondemand.c:62:
first defined here
>
> Caused by commit f935195b8a341d7ffdf600dd98a657f2f09b7908 ("[CPUFREQ]
> ondemand/conservative: sanitize sampling_rate restrictions").
>
> I have reverted that commit for today.
Dave, I have found another minor issue and will send you three patches.
Two cleanups and the third fixing this one as on top patch.
Decide yourself what way is best to add things (revert and re-add or
just add the three I post).
The problem of the on top approach could be that if this is merged
to linux next you could have a non-building condition if you compile in
conservative + ondemand when bisecting.
Thomas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-05 9:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-05 7:54 linux-next: cpufreq tree build failure Stephen Rothwell
2009-02-05 9:33 ` Thomas Renninger
2009-02-05 9:47 ` Thomas Renninger [this message]
2009-02-05 17:45 ` Dave Jones
2009-02-05 20:57 ` Thomas Renninger
2009-02-05 21:34 ` Dave Jones
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-08-03 2:28 Stephen Rothwell
2009-08-03 23:22 ` Thomas Renninger
2009-08-03 23:44 ` Dave Jones
2009-02-24 6:21 Stephen Rothwell
2009-02-24 16:51 ` Dave Jones
2009-02-25 3:29 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-02-25 3:45 ` Dave Jones
2009-02-25 4:23 ` Stephen Rothwell
2009-01-20 2:50 Stephen Rothwell
2009-01-20 5:30 ` Dave Jones
2009-01-20 6:23 ` Stephen Rothwell
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=200902051047.56609.trenn@suse.de \
--to=trenn@suse.de \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/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).