From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the percpu tree Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 06:13:14 +0100 Message-ID: <20110104051314.GA6748@mtj.dyndns.org> References: <20110104152105.5cc7c3a9.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-ew0-f46.google.com ([209.85.215.46]:47121 "EHLO mail-ew0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750727Ab1ADFNY (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2011 00:13:24 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110104152105.5cc7c3a9.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Rusty Russell , Christoph Lameter , Ingo Molnar , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, Stephen. On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 03:21:05PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > After merging the percpu tree, today's linux-next build (x86_64 > allmodconfig) failed like this: > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/therm_throt.c: In function 'intel_thermal_interrupt': > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mcheck/therm_throt.c:368: error: implicit declaration of function 'this_cpu_has' > > Caused by commit 6ac0bb7148b93fb40bccba5dff06d51a3e3ea283 ("x86: use > this_cpu_has for thermal_interrupt"). > > this_cpu_has() does not exist anywhere except in this introduced usage. > > I have used the percpu tree from next-20101231 for today. My apologies. I forgot an earlier patch to introduce this_cpu_has() macro. I've reverted the offending commit. Thank you. -- tejun