From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261922AbUL0QJU (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Dec 2004 11:09:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261920AbUL0QJT (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Dec 2004 11:09:19 -0500 Received: from holomorphy.com ([207.189.100.168]:27601 "EHLO holomorphy.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261922AbUL0QJF (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Dec 2004 11:09:05 -0500 Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:08:48 -0800 From: William Lee Irwin III To: Oleg Nesterov Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, paulus@samba.org, davem@davemloft.net, lethal@linux-sh.org, davidm@hpl.hp.com, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, takata@inux-m32r.org, ak@suse.de, rth@twiddle.net, matthew@wil.cx Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix conflicting cpu_idle() declarations Message-ID: <20041227160848.GC771@holomorphy.com> References: <41D033FE.7AD17627@tv-sign.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <41D033FE.7AD17627@tv-sign.ru> Organization: The Domain of Holomorphy User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 27, 2004 at 07:10:38PM +0300, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > cpu_idle() declared/defined in > init/main.c: void cpu_idle(void) > i386/kernel/process.c void cpu_idle(void) > i386/kernel/smpboot.c: int cpu_idle(void) > i386/mach-voyager/voyager_smp.c: int cpu_idle(void) > ppc/kernel/idle.c: int cpu_idle(void) > ppc/kernel/smp.c: int cpu_idle(void *unused) > ppc64/kernel/idle.c: int cpu_idle(void) > ppc64/kernel/smp.c: int cpu_idle(void *unused) > sparc/kernel/process.c: int cpu_idle(void) > sparc64/kernel/process.c: int cpu_idle(void) > sh/kernel/process.c: void cpu_idle(void *unused) > sh/kernel/smp.c: int cpu_idle(void *unused) > ia64/kernel/smpboot.c: int cpu_idle(void) > ia64/kernel/process.c: void cpu_idle(void *unused) It's remarkable that several arches are internally inconsistent. Anyway, this will likely be a shoo-in, as it removes more code than it adds. The mess surrounding cpu_idle() has been aggravating for some time. -- wli