>> > actually, this breaks the build on !SPARSEIRQ because we will use that
>> > class in the non-sparseirq case. So we've converted a build warning to
>> > a build failure ;-)
>>
>> Please give me your .config and tell me your arch. my ia64 box (ia64 is
>> !SPARSEIRQ) can build the akpm patch.
>
> The expected build failure is obvious from reading the code:
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS
> void early_init_irq_lock_class(void)
> {
> #ifndef CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ
> struct irq_desc *desc;
> int i;
>
> for_each_irq_desc(i, desc) {
> if (!desc)
> continue;
>
> lockdep_set_class(&desc->lock, &irq_desc_lock_class);
>
> Note that it's an #ifndef sparseirq, not an #ifdef sparseirq condition.
I see. thanks.
It seems my first proposal is better.
or, following #ifdef ?
#if defined(CONFIG_SPARSE_IRQ) || defined(CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS)
/*
* lockdep: we want to handle all irq_desc locks as a single lock-class:
*/
static struct lock_class_key irq_desc_lock_class;
#endif
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
