From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Gortmaker Subject: Re: [PATCH] parisc: fix longstanding build failures for !CONFIG_PCI Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:12:22 -0500 Message-ID: <4F4BAB66.2000105@windriver.com> References: <1330298677-17205-1-git-send-email-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> <1330356057.2822.44.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1330356057.2822.44.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com> Sender: linux-parisc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: James Bottomley Cc: jejb@parisc-linux.org, kyle@mcmartin.ca, deller@gmx.de, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, mst@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Randy Dunlap List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On 12-02-27 10:20 AM, James Bottomley wrote: > On Sun, 2012-02-26 at 18:24 -0500, Paul Gortmaker wrote: >> Upstream commit fea80311a939a746533a6d7e7c3183729d6a3faf >> >> "iomap: make IOPORT/PCI mapping functions conditional" >> >> introduced an arch independent stub for pci_iounmap() but the >> parisc had its own that was unconditionally built. So builds >> since v3.0-3553-gfea8031 have been failing with: >> >> arch/parisc/lib/iomap.c:439:6: error: redefinition of 'pci_iounmap' >> include/asm-generic/iomap.h:75:20: note: previous definition of 'pci_iounmap' was here >> >> Making the parisc one specific to CONFIG_PCI fixes the problem. >> >> CC: Randy Dunlap >> Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker >> --- >> >> [This fixes the linux-next builds that have been consistently failing >> since last July -- http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/target/2069/ ] >> >> diff --git a/arch/parisc/lib/iomap.c b/arch/parisc/lib/iomap.c >> index fb8e10a..dc0a2c3 100644 >> --- a/arch/parisc/lib/iomap.c >> +++ b/arch/parisc/lib/iomap.c > > This should break more than just PARISC ... any non-PCI build for any > arch should be broken, so this is the proposed generic fix: > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-parisc&m=132794183521355 Similar comments here, it would have saved me looking at it at all if this was simply present in linux-next anytime after last July. Thanks, Paul. > > James > >