From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dave Jones Subject: Re: linux-next: cpufreq tree build failure Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 12:45:36 -0500 Message-ID: <20090205174536.GA6358@redhat.com> References: <20090205185420.38214a06.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <200902051047.56609.trenn@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:44052 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752064AbZBERpu (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Feb 2009 12:45:50 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200902051047.56609.trenn@suse.de> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Thomas Renninger Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-next@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 10:47:56AM +0100, Thomas Renninger wrote: > 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 I added the 'static's directly to the patches, and regenerated the tree on kernel.org For other stuff, unless it's a build-fix, send an incremental diff ? Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk