From: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
Fix build when CONFIG_X86_POWERNOW_K8_ACPI=n:
(seems that someone forgot to test this build combo)
(fix 25 of 50 randconfig build errors)
linux-next-20080808/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c:1334: error: implicit declaration of function 'powernow_k8_cpu_preinit_acpi'
linux-next-20080808/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c:1352: error: 'acpi_perf_data' undeclared (first use in this function)
Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
--- linux-next-20080808.orig/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c
+++ linux-next-20080808/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c
@@ -1331,7 +1331,9 @@ static int __cpuinit powernowk8_init(voi
}
if (supported_cpus == num_online_cpus()) {
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_POWERNOW_K8_ACPI
powernow_k8_cpu_preinit_acpi();
+#endif
printk(KERN_INFO PFX "Found %d %s "
"processors (%d cpu cores) (" VERSION ")\n",
num_online_nodes(),
@@ -1349,7 +1351,9 @@ static void __exit powernowk8_exit(void)
cpufreq_unregister_driver(&cpufreq_amd64_driver);
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_POWERNOW_K8_ACPI
free_percpu(acpi_perf_data);
+#endif
}
MODULE_AUTHOR("Paul Devriendt <[email protected]> and Mark Langsdorf <[email protected]>");
> From: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
>
> Fix build when CONFIG_X86_POWERNOW_K8_ACPI=n:
> (seems that someone forgot to test this build combo)
> (fix 25 of 50 randconfig build errors)
>
> linux-next-20080808/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c:
> 1334: error: implicit declaration of function
> 'powernow_k8_cpu_preinit_acpi'
> linux-next-20080808/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c:
> 1352: error: 'acpi_perf_data' undeclared (first use in this function)
>
> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
Ack, thanks.
-Mark Langsdorf
Operating System Research Center
AMD
On Fri, Aug 08, 2008 at 10:19:50AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> From: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
>
> Fix build when CONFIG_X86_POWERNOW_K8_ACPI=n:
> (seems that someone forgot to test this build combo)
> (fix 25 of 50 randconfig build errors)
Yikes. I'll add that to my pre-push test script.
(I currently only test allmodconfig/allyes/allno for all
the changed files within each patch)
> linux-next-20080808/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c:1334: error: implicit declaration of function 'powernow_k8_cpu_preinit_acpi'
> linux-next-20080808/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c:1352: error: 'acpi_perf_data' undeclared (first use in this function)
>
> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> --- linux-next-20080808.orig/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c
> +++ linux-next-20080808/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c
> @@ -1331,7 +1331,9 @@ static int __cpuinit powernowk8_init(voi
> }
>
> if (supported_cpus == num_online_cpus()) {
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_POWERNOW_K8_ACPI
> powernow_k8_cpu_preinit_acpi();
> +#endif
I think something like below may be better..
Same thing, but with one less ifdef ?
Dave
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c
index 7a09ba4..3ba6fd2 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c
@@ -951,6 +951,7 @@ static void powernow_k8_cpu_exit_acpi(struct powernow_k8_data *data)
}
#else
+static int powernow_k8_cpu_preinit_acpi(struct powernow_k8_data *data) { return -ENODEV; }
static int powernow_k8_cpu_init_acpi(struct powernow_k8_data *data) { return -ENODEV; }
static void powernow_k8_cpu_exit_acpi(struct powernow_k8_data *data) { return; }
static void powernow_k8_acpi_pst_values(struct powernow_k8_data *data, unsigned int index) { return; }
@@ -1349,7 +1351,9 @@ static void __exit powernowk8_exit(void)
dprintk("exit\n");
cpufreq_unregister_driver(&cpufreq_amd64_driver);
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_POWERNOW_K8_ACPI
free_percpu(acpi_perf_data);
+#ifdef
}
MODULE_AUTHOR("Paul Devriendt <[email protected]> and Mark Langsdorf <[email protected]>");
--
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
On Fri, 8 Aug 2008 13:38:22 -0400 Dave Jones wrote:
> I think something like below may be better..
> Same thing, but with one less ifdef ?
Close, but no cigar.
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c
> index 7a09ba4..3ba6fd2 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c
> @@ -951,6 +951,7 @@ static void powernow_k8_cpu_exit_acpi(struct powernow_k8_data *data)
> }
>
> #else
> +static int powernow_k8_cpu_preinit_acpi(struct powernow_k8_data *data) { return -ENODEV; }
(void) // parameters
> static int powernow_k8_cpu_init_acpi(struct powernow_k8_data *data) { return -ENODEV; }
> static void powernow_k8_cpu_exit_acpi(struct powernow_k8_data *data) { return; }
> static void powernow_k8_acpi_pst_values(struct powernow_k8_data *data, unsigned int index) { return; }
> @@ -1349,7 +1351,9 @@ static void __exit powernowk8_exit(void)
> dprintk("exit\n");
>
> cpufreq_unregister_driver(&cpufreq_amd64_driver);
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_POWERNOW_K8_ACPI
> free_percpu(acpi_perf_data);
> +#ifdef
#endif
> }
>
> MODULE_AUTHOR("Paul Devriendt <[email protected]> and Mark Langsdorf <[email protected]>");
---
(your) new patch:
---
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
--- linux-next-20080808.orig/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c
+++ linux-next-20080808/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c
@@ -951,6 +951,7 @@ static void powernow_k8_cpu_exit_acpi(st
}
#else
+static int powernow_k8_cpu_preinit_acpi(void) { return -ENODEV; }
static int powernow_k8_cpu_init_acpi(struct powernow_k8_data *data) { return -ENODEV; }
static void powernow_k8_cpu_exit_acpi(struct powernow_k8_data *data) { return; }
static void powernow_k8_acpi_pst_values(struct powernow_k8_data *data, unsigned int index) { return; }
@@ -1349,7 +1350,9 @@ static void __exit powernowk8_exit(void)
cpufreq_unregister_driver(&cpufreq_amd64_driver);
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_POWERNOW_K8_ACPI
free_percpu(acpi_perf_data);
+#endif
}
MODULE_AUTHOR("Paul Devriendt <[email protected]> and Mark Langsdorf <[email protected]>");
On Fri, Aug 08, 2008 at 10:50:40AM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Aug 2008 13:38:22 -0400 Dave Jones wrote:
>
> > I think something like below may be better..
> > Same thing, but with one less ifdef ?
>
> Close, but no cigar.
Yeah, that's what you get for posting before building.
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c
> > index 7a09ba4..3ba6fd2 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/powernow-k8.c
> > @@ -951,6 +951,7 @@ static void powernow_k8_cpu_exit_acpi(struct powernow_k8_data *data)
> > }
> >
> > #else
> > +static int powernow_k8_cpu_preinit_acpi(struct powernow_k8_data *data) { return -ENODEV; }
> (void) // parameters
I made the same change locally.
> (your) new patch:
I'll punt this on to Linus with your Signed-off-by: and Marks ACKed by.
thanks,
Dave
--
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk