On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 10:13:14PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 5:23 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi Arnd,
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 5:16 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Without CONFIG_SMP, we get a build failure:
> >>
> >> In file included from include/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:5,
> >> from arch/arm/include/uapi/asm/byteorder.h:22,
> >> from include/asm-generic/bitops/le.h:6,
> >> from arch/arm/include/asm/bitops.h:342,
> >> from include/linux/bitops.h:18,
> >> from include/linux/kernel.h:11,
> >> from include/asm-generic/bug.h:18,
> >> from arch/arm/include/asm/bug.h:60,
> >> from include/linux/bug.h:5,
> >> from include/linux/io.h:23,
> >> from drivers/soc/renesas/r9a06g032-smp.c:11:
> >> drivers/soc/renesas/r9a06g032-smp.c: In function 'r9a06g032_smp_boot_secondary':
> >> drivers/soc/renesas/r9a06g032-smp.c:43:21: error: 'secondary_startup' undeclared (first use in this function)
> >> writel(__pa_symbol(secondary_startup), cpu_bootaddr);
> >> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >>
> >> This makes the compilation of that file conditional on SMP support.
> >> It would probably be better for consistency to leave that file
> >> in arch/arm/mach-shmobile/, matching what we do for all other smp
> >> operations.
> >
> > Shouldn't that comment be moved below the "---"? ;-)
>
> Maybe
>
> > I thought the (10Y ;-) plan was to have no more code under arch/arm/mach-*/?
> > Note that the suport for the new RZ/N1D SoC doesn't use any other code in
> > mach-shmobile.
>
> The SMP code is the main part we never figured out where else to put,
> so it's typically the only thing we still have for new platforms under
> arch/arm/.
>
> >> Fixes: cde4f86f9249 ("arm: shmobile: Add the R9A06G032 SMP enabler driver")
> >> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
Thanks, I've applied this (with the full commit message).
Lets work out where the code should live and move it if necessary.
