Subject: Re: [BUG] Multiple definition of pcibios_max_latency
From: Myron Stowe <mstowe@redhat.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <mike@compulab.co.il>
In-Reply-To: <20120204125904.GU889@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <20120204125904.GU889@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 10:59:17 -0700
Message-ID: <1328551157.2264.11.camel@zim.stowe>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 3290
Lines: 75

On Sat, 2012-02-04 at 12:59 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> While building my test PXA configuration, I came across:
> 
> drivers/built-in.o:(.data+0x230): multiple definition of `pcibios_max_latency'
> arch/arm/common/built-in.o:(.data+0x40c): first defined here
> make[1]: *** [vmlinux.o] Error 1
> 
> This was introduced by:
> 
> commit 96c5590058d7fded14f43af2ab521436cecf3125
> Author: Myron Stowe <mstowe@redhat.com>
> Date:   Fri Oct 28 15:48:38 2011 -0600
> 
>     PCI: Pull PCI 'latency timer' setup up into the core
> 
>     The 'latency timer' of PCI devices, both Type 0 and Type 1,
>     is setup in architecture-specific code [see: 'pcibios_set_master()'].
>     There are two approaches being taken by all the architectures - check
>     if the 'latency timer' is currently set between 16 and 255 and if not
>     bring it within bounds, or, do nothing (and then there is the
>     gratuitously different PA-RISC implementation).
> 
>     There is nothing architecture-specific about PCI's 'latency timer' so
>     this patch pulls its setup functionality up into the PCI core by
>     creating a generic 'pcibios_set_master()' function using the '__weak'
>     attribute which can be used by all architectures as a default which,
>     if necessary, can then be over-ridden by architecture-specific code.
> 
>     No functional change.
> 
>     Signed-off-by: Myron Stowe <myron.stowe@redhat.com>
>     Signed-off-by: Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
> 
> which moved the handling of pcibios_set_master() into core code for
> everyone but ARM:
> 
>  arch/blackfin/include/asm/pci.h         |    4 ----
>  arch/frv/mb93090-mb00/pci-frv.c         |    6 ------
>  arch/frv/mb93090-mb00/pci-frv.h         |    2 --
>  arch/h8300/include/asm/pci.h            |    5 -----
>  arch/mips/pci/pci.c                     |    6 ------
>  arch/mn10300/unit-asb2305/pci-asb2305.c |    6 ------
>  arch/mn10300/unit-asb2305/pci-asb2305.h |    2 --
>  arch/sh/drivers/pci/pci.c               |    6 ------
>  arch/x86/include/asm/pci_x86.h          |    2 --
>  arch/x86/pci/i386.c                     |    6 ------
>  drivers/pci/pci.c                       |   29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  include/linux/pci.h                     |    3 +++
>  12 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
> 
> I think the right solution is to delete the (now duplicate) definition 
> of pcibios_max_latency in arch/arm/common/it8152.c.  Please comment.

Yes, that commit is the culprit.  I was concerned about ARM in general
when I posted this series as I do not have a compile environment for it,
nor am I at all familiar with ARM to know if I had covered all the
possible variations (i.e. 8152 vs other, non 8152 types).

Will deleting the 'pcibios_max_latency' definition in
arch/arm/common/it8152.c be the correct solution for all ARM variations
(I don't want to try and fix one while breaking others)?

I'll wait for your response/guidance and if this is the correct action
generate a patch right away.

Thanks,
 Myron


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/