On 09/29/11 15:57, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 13:35:16 -0700
> Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Fix build when CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MID is enabled but
>> CONFIG_X86_MRST is not enabled. Fixes this build error:
>
> This looks wrong. Unfortunately until we get kernel.org back its hard to
> do much about it and see what is in all the trees.
>
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MID
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_MRST
>>
>> static inline enum mrst_cpu_type mrst_identify_cpu(void)
>> {
>> return __mrst_cpu_chip;
>> }
>>
>> -#else /* !CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MID */
>> +#else /* !CONFIG_X86_MRST */
>>
>> #define mrst_identify_cpu() (0)
>>
>> -#endif /* !CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MID */
>> +#endif /* !CONFIG_X86_MRST */
>
> This breaks Medfield so NAK
>
> The correct behaviour should be
>
> INTEL_MID defined -> mrst_cpu_chip has meaning
> INTEL_MID not defined -> mrst_identify_chip is 0
>
> your change makes it 0 for Medfield which means it will crash on boot.
arch/x86/platform/mrst/mrst.c -- where __mrst_cpu_chip lives --
is only built when CONFIG_X86_MRST is enabled. You make it sound like
__mrst_cpu_chip needs to live any time that CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MID
is enabled, which sounds reasonable to me.
caveat: given the current linux-next merge trees (as you mentioned).
Does anyone care? If so, please help fix this muck.
--
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
--
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
