> Umm... the correct correct declaration and definition would be > > DECLARE_PER_CPU(short [MAX_COMPACT_NODES], __sn_cnodeide_to_nasid); > > and > > DEFINE_PER_CPU(short [MAX_COMPACT_NODES], __sn_cnodeide_to_nasid); > > So that the first part contains full type. Doing it the other way > might cause problems if the __weak trick is turned on. That's what Randy's patch uses ... but doing it the "right" way gives me the "has no CRC!" warning. This seems to be a feature of exported per cpu arrays. If I hack up a driver to make use of softirq_work_list, I see a similar no CRC warning for it. Is this problem in the ia64 tool chain[1]? Or do other architectures have problems with exported per cpu arrays? -Tony [1] My default toolchain is uses gcc 4.1.2. But 4.4.1 has the same behavior. -- 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
