Hi, On Monday, March 30, 2015 10:37:42 PM Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 01:44:34PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > On Tuesday, March 03, 2015 04:40:02 AM Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > On 02/27/15 06:30, Kukjin Kim wrote: > > > > On 02/25/15 20:46, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > >> 2015-02-25 12:26 GMT+01:00 Russell King <rmk+kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > > >>> The following error was observed with SMP=n in v4.0-rc1: > > > >>> > > > >>> arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c: In function 'exynos_cpu0_enter_aftr': > > > >>> arch/arm/mach-exynos/pm.c:246:4: error: implicit declaration of function 'arch_send_wakeup_ipi_mask' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > > > >>> > > > >>> As the code unconditionally calls a function only available with SMP=y, > > > >>> make the Exynos PM support depend on SMP. > > > >>> > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > >> > > > >> Hi, > > > >> > > > >> Thanks for the patch but this already waits for Kukjin top be picked > > > >> up. The first patch was similar to yours (adds dependency on SMP), > > > >> sent on 4th of February: > > > >> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/436231/ > > > >> > > > >> But later Bartlomiej fixed this in other way (allowing to use cpuidle > > > >> on non-SMP): > > > >> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/436445/ > > > >> > > > >> Unfortunately none of them were picked up. > > > >> > > > > I've missed the fix, sorry. > > > > > > > > BTW, as you know, all of exynos SoCs are based on SMP so generally (in > > > > normal case) there is no reason to use non-SMP on exynos > > > > platforms...even though I understand the build error should be fixed... > > > > > > > > Anyway, I'll have a look Bart's patch and Russell's fix in this weekend. > > > > > > > > > > Firstly, let me take rmk's patch for the randconfig build error...BTW > > > > What is wrong with picking my patch instead? It is non-invasive and fixes > > cpuidle support on UP (which is a regression from previous kernels)? > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/2/4/521 > > > > > I'm still wondering exynos stuff needs to support non-SMP and need to > > > think more about its usefulness?... > > > > Currently UP is supported and at least I find it useful for testing/debug > > purposes. If you want to to make Exynos SMP only thats OK but it should > > be done globally for Exynos arch support not just for cpuidle support. > > Has either of these happened yet? I don't see either in arm-soc. > > (lkml.org seems to be - as seems typical - having problems. The above > URL now returns a blank message.) My fix has been in Kukjin's tree (and thus linux-next) for the last two weeks: http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/kgene/linux-samsung.git/commit/?h=v4.0-samsung-fixes-2&id=cfdda3535f87e752780ca18a57d13db58f6a6913 Unfortunately it seems that Samsung fixes branch has not been pushed to arm-soc tree yet. Best regards, -- Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Samsung R&D Institute Poland Samsung Electronics -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |