Re: [PATCH 1/1] Kernel compile bug in 2.6.22.6/7 {maybe more}ARM/StrongARM

From: Andrew Morton
Date: Tue Sep 25 2007 - 13:09:17 EST


On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 12:58:34 -0400 Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 09:52:29AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 10:36:51 -0400 Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > commit 184c44d2049c4db7ef6ec65794546954da2c6a0e
> > > Author: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Date: Wed May 2 19:27:08 2007 +0200
> > >
> > > [PATCH] x86-64: fix x86_64-mm-sched-clock-share
> > >
> > > Fix for the following patch. Provide dummy cpufreq functions when
> > > CPUFREQ is not compiled in.
> > >
> > > Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > I don't remember seeing any problem here, so I'm not entirely sure what
> > > this was supposed to be fixing. Perhaps the -mm-esque patch name
> > > will provide Andrew/Andi clues. It lacks sufficient information for
> > > my brain to guess what the problem was.
> >
> > Oh geeze. sched-clock-share went through about 18 different versions, was
> > merged, unmerged, remerged, dropped, etc. I don't recall at what stage in
> > this mess the above fix was inserted, sorry.
> >
> > > "Fix for the following patch" is also something that really should
> > > never be added to a git changelog too, because 'next' means absolutely
> > > nothing to me, nor I expect 99% of changelog readers.
> >
> > 184c44d2049c4db7ef6ec65794546954da2c6a0e should never have existed,
> > actually. I intended that Andi fold it into the base patch prior to
> > sending it to Linus. He normally does that, but it looks like this
> > one was handled as a standalone commit for some reason.
>
> So lets see what happens if we revert it ?
>

<grep flurry>

OK, here: ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.21-rc5/2.6.21-rc5-mm3/broken-out/fix-x86_64-mm-sched-clock-share.patch

So I guess what we want to do here is to revert that patch, test i386
allnoconfig and then fix up anything which breaks.

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