From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1751110AbeAPCEF (ORCPT <rfc822;ralf@linux-mips.org> + 1 other);
        Mon, 15 Jan 2018 21:04:05 -0500
Received: from mail-wm0-f68.google.com ([74.125.82.68]:44082 "EHLO
        mail-wm0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1750740AbeAPCED (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 15 Jan 2018 21:04:03 -0500
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBou8Ai0F4zOXFNTofOMYcQPtW/8LLI1xnsxZYDy41bK9OtbmaWgcBZzeQ4MeZy7y4GepK4XJ9w==
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 03:03:59 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, keescook@chromium.org,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
        John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/36] hrtimer: Provide softirq context hrtimers
Message-ID: <20180116020359.w3qjhbhrkmjyzolu@gmail.com>
References: <20171221104205.7269-1-anna-maria@linutronix.de>
 <20180116013917.qkm3codqbugskgwk@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180116013917.qkm3codqbugskgwk@gmail.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>


* Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:

> No serious changes intended, but please double check the end result once I've 
> pushed it out after local testing.

I made the fix below for the !NO_HZ_COMMON || !HIGH_RES_TIMERS case, which would 
fail with a build failure due to non-available __hrtimer_next_event_base().

These functions won't get called, so the fix I picked was to make the code 
unconditionally available.

That's the model I'd encourage going forward: we should reduce the !hrtimer and 
hrtimer differences, in fact we should eventually implement !hrtimers as a 
compatibility mode of the hrtimers code, with no separate #ifdeffery.

Thanks,

	Ingo

diff --git a/kernel/time/hrtimer.c b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
index 5bd0fe9b6402..ba4674e9adc2 100644
--- a/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
+++ b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
@@ -487,7 +487,6 @@ __next_base(struct hrtimer_cpu_base *cpu_base, unsigned int *active)
 #define for_each_active_base(base, cpu_base, active)	\
 	while ((base = __next_base((cpu_base), &(active))))
 
-#if defined(CONFIG_NO_HZ_COMMON) || defined(CONFIG_HIGH_RES_TIMERS)
 static ktime_t __hrtimer_next_event_base(struct hrtimer_cpu_base *cpu_base,
 					 unsigned int active,
 					 ktime_t expires_next)
@@ -539,7 +538,6 @@ static ktime_t __hrtimer_get_next_event(struct hrtimer_cpu_base *cpu_base,
 
 	return expires_next;
 }
-#endif
 
 static inline ktime_t hrtimer_update_base(struct hrtimer_cpu_base *base)
 {