Messages in this thread | | | From | Arnd Bergmann <> | Date | Wed, 21 Jun 2017 20:02:38 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 20/28] ARM: owl: Implement CPU enable-method for S500 |
| |
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 6:48 PM, Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de> wrote: > Am 21.06.2017 um 12:25 schrieb Arnd Bergmann: >> On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 10:16 AM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de> wrote: >>>> Allow to bring up CPU1. >>>> >>>> Based on LeMaker linux-actions tree. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de> >>>> --- >>>> v3 -> v4: Unchanged >>>> >>>> v3: new >>>> >>>> arch/arm/mach-actions/Makefile | 3 + >>>> arch/arm/mach-actions/headsmp.S | 68 ++++++++++++++++ >>>> arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c | 166 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> >>> I now see build errors in linux-next: >>> >>> /git/arm-soc/arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c: In function 'write_pen_release': >>> /git/arm-soc/arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:39:2: error: >>> 'pen_release' undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean >> >> I have a fix and tested it now. Please fold this into your patch: >> >> Arnd >> >> Subject: [PATCH] ARM: owl: fix non-SMP build >> >> arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c: In function 'write_pen_release': >> arch/arm/mach-actions/platsmp.c:39:2: error: 'pen_release' undeclared >> (first use in this function); did you mean 'seq_release'? >> >> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-actions/Makefile b/arch/arm/mach-actions/Makefile >> index 217e95d04b43..94f8dbafba21 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm/mach-actions/Makefile >> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-actions/Makefile >> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ >> -obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ACTIONS) += owl.o >> -obj-${CONFIG_ARCH_ACTIONS} += platsmp.o headsmp.o >> +obj-y += owl.o >> +obj-$(CONFIG_SMP) += platsmp.o headsmp.o > > Sorry. Fixed up the two patches, thanks! > > Interestingly the below issue had been found by automatic patch testing, > but the above wasn't. Maybe you can contribute your non-SMP config for > the bots, to help catch this earlier?
This was just a randconfig build. On ARM32, we do test "multi_v7_defconfig+CONFIG_SMP=n" in kernelci, but that only tests mach-actions after that gets added to multi_v7_defconfig. Not sure if it's worth adding an allmodconfig+CONFIG_SMP=n" build, the allmodconfig builds are rather expensive.
Arnd
| |