On Sun, 2015-04-19 at 22:17 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > Hi Michael, Hi Guenter, > On 04/19/2015 08:01 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > > Someone needs to be doing s390/alpha builds with that enabled anyway, because > > otherwise a clash between generic code and s390/alpha won't be caught. > > > > Or if that's too hard we can rename the powerpc version, but it seems silly to > > rename a powerpc variable to deal with a debug option that is only useful for > > s390/alpha. > > The debug option is intended for all _other_ architectures, to ensure that > changes made for those don't break alpha/s390 builds. alpha/s390 have > ARCH_NEEDS_WEAK_PER_CPU and don't need the debug option. But that can't actually work. If you introduce a percpu variable in generic code that has the same name as a variable in the s390/alpha code, the only way you can detect that is by building for s390/alpha. Sure it might catch two variables in generic code that have the same name, but that will get caught as soon as someone does a s390/alpha build anyway - which is at least every night for linux-next. More likely it catches cases like this, which is variables in code that will never build for s390/alpha. So it just seems like a PITA to me. > Sowmini's patch would change the variable name in the lib/ code. But that was > not the question here. The question was if the powerpc code could be changed > to use the generic iommu code instead of using the powerpc specific code. Not for this merge window sorry, we need to test it properly. cheers -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
