Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 16 Apr 2008 14:57:24 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: x86: ppc fixes for find_first_bit |
| |
* Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> Hello Thomas, > > I see Ingo has applied three fixes to the x86-tree: > find_first_bit() ppc fix > powerpc: fix powerpc build > find_next_bit() fix > > Could you please give some insight in what went wrong with > ppc and powerpc? > > "find_first_bit() ppc fix" disables the use of find_first_bit > for every user of GENERIC_FIND_NEXT_BIT=y. It replaces it by a > macro to call find_next_bit with offset=0. It should be possible > for an arch to use GENERIC_FIND_NEXT_BIT=y and implement > find_first_bit by itself. > > "powerpc: fix powerpc build" removes the private 'implementation' > of asm-generic/bitops/find.h. It seems correct code to me. What > was the problem here? If it is duplicate declarations, then > I would suggest putting #ifndef GENERIC_FIND_NEXT_BIT around > them. > > "find_next_bit() fix" changes asm-generic/bitops/find.h to > declare find_next_bit only if CONFIG_GENERIC_FIND_NEXT_BIT=n. > That is indeed a good change. It would be better if this > file disappeared completely, though.
we had trouble making ppc64 defconfig build fine with your bitops changes applied (Thomas might still have the build failure logs). The fixes are ad-hoc band-aids to get it to build. We used crosscompilers to build on ppc64.
Ingo
| |