From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: linux-next: sparc tree build failure Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:28:16 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20091126.152816.233622295.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20091126201607.023e1269.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:47828 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750919AbZKZX17 (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Nov 2009 18:27:59 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20091126201607.023e1269.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: sfr@canb.auug.org.au Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de From: Stephen Rothwell Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 20:16:07 +1100 > Today's linux-next build (sparc32 defconfig) failed like this: > > arch/sparc/lib/atomic32.c: In function '__atomic_add_return': > arch/sparc/lib/atomic32.c:34: error: implicit declaration of function '__raw_spin_lock_irqsave' > arch/sparc/lib/atomic32.c:38: error: implicit declaration of function '__raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore' > > Caused by commit 4df286e52917c95c415400367cfd523dfbb0f93a ("sparc: Make > atomic locks raw") which I have reverted for today. Ho hum, that's the second iteration and it broke the build first time too. __raw_spin_lock_irqsave() definitions don't exist anywhere in the tree, I wonder what this was even build tested against? I'm reverting, and I'll be hard pressed to add new versions without solid proof that it doesn't break the build a third time :-)