On Friday 12 June 2009, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Thu 2009-06-11 23:46:27, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Thursday 11 June 2009, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > On Thu 2009-06-11 15:32:18, Heiko Carstens wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 01:09:19AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > > On Tuesday 09 June 2009, Cornelia Huck wrote: > > > > > > The *_nvs_* routines in swsusp.c make use of the io*map() > > > > > > functions, which are only provided for HAS_IOMEM, thus > > > > > > breaking compilation if HAS_IOMEM is not set. Fix this > > > > > > by moving the *_nvs_* routines into hibernation_nvs.c, which > > > > > > is only compiled if HAS_IOMEM is set. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, I added the GPLv2 line to the header comment and changed the name > > > > > of the file to hibernate_nvs.c (to match the other changes in the works). > > > > > > > > > > I'll carry out some compilation testing on it and put it into the tree shortly. > > > > > > > > Rafael, could you add the patch below as well? > > > > Or should that go in via git390? > > > > > > > > Subject: [PATCH] PM: add empty suspend/resume device irq functions > > > > > > > > From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > git commit 0a0c5168 "PM: Introduce functions for suspending and resuming > > > > device interrupts" introduced some helper functions. However these > > > > functions are only available for architectures which support > > > > GENERIC_HARDIRQS. > > > > > > > > Other architectures will see this build error: > > > > > > > > drivers/built-in.o: In function `sysdev_suspend': > > > > (.text+0x15138): undefined reference to `check_wakeup_irqs' > > > > drivers/built-in.o: In function `device_power_up': > > > > (.text+0x1cb66): undefined reference to `resume_device_irqs' > > > > drivers/built-in.o: In function `device_power_down': > > > > (.text+0x1cb92): undefined reference to `suspend_device_irqs' > > > > > > > > To fix this add some empty inline functions for !GENERIC_HARDIRQS. > > > > > > I don't think that's right fix. If architecture does not use > > > GENERIC_HARDIRQS, it may want to implement *_device_irqs() > > > itself. Before your patch, it could, after your patch, it can not. > > > > > > Better put those empty functions in arch/s390/include? > > > > If any of the affected architectures wants to implement *_device_irqs() > > itself, it can do the appropriate change in future. For now, let's not break > > compilation on them, shall we? > > Well, if one of those architectures will want to implement > *_device_irqs(), it will have to either modify s390, and all other > !GENERIC_HARDIRQS architectures. Why will it? I think it will be sufficient to modify the header changed by this patch and the architecture in question. Best, Rafael _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
