Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 10 Jun 2009 02:06:04 +1000 | From | Stephen Rothwell <> | Subject | Re: linux-next: voyager tree build failure |
| |
Hi James,
On Tue, 09 Jun 2009 10:18:38 -0500 James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > > Thanks for finding this. The fix looks to be a dummy definition of this > function for x86_64. The final fix (which has been under discussion) > will be the elimination of safe_smp_processor_id() altogether. > > I've merged this into the > > [VOYAGER] x86: add {safe,hard}_smp_processor_id to smp_ops > > patch and respun the tree (and built it with an x86-64 cross compiler), > so it should be safe to include next time around
Thanks. We will see how we do (later) in the morning.
-- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/ [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |