Sorry, my fault. I made a typo mistake when sending the patch. I will fix it and resend the patch.
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:24 AM, kbuild test robot <l...@intel.com> wrote: > Hi Lianwei, > > [auto build test ERROR on pm/linux-next] > [also build test ERROR on v4.6-rc1 next-20160331] > [if your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, please drop us a note to > help improving the system] > > url: > https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Lianwei-Wang/smp-make-wake-up-idle-cpus-more-generic/20160331-155548 > base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git > linux-next > config: i386-randconfig-n0-201613 (attached as .config) > reproduce: > # save the attached .config to linux build tree > make ARCH=i386 > > All error/warnings (new ones prefixed by >>): > > drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c: In function 'cpuidle_latency_notify': >>> drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c:623:37: error: expected ')' before ';' token > wake_up_idle_cpus((cpu_online_mask); > ^ >>> drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c:625:1: error: expected ';' before '}' token > } > ^ >>> drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c:625:1: warning: no return statement in function >>> returning non-void [-Wreturn-type] > > vim +623 drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c > > 617 * and then recalculate a new suitable C-state. Just do a cross-cpu > IPI; that > 618 * wakes them all right up. > 619 */ > 620 static int cpuidle_latency_notify(struct notifier_block *b, > 621 unsigned long l, void *v) > 622 { > > 623 wake_up_idle_cpus((cpu_online_mask); > 624 return NOTIFY_OK; > > 625 } > 626 > 627 static struct notifier_block cpuidle_latency_notifier = { > 628 .notifier_call = cpuidle_latency_notify, > > --- > 0-DAY kernel test infrastructure Open Source Technology Center > https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all Intel Corporation
