On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 08:31:32AM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 05:53:57PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I was building a kernel for an iPaq {SA1110} and ran into this.
> >
> > linux-2.6.22.7/arch/arm/mach-sa1100/generic.c:
> > Has a: #include <linux/cpufreq.h>
> > Then afterwards there is a: #if defined(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_SA1100) ||
> > defined(CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_SA1110)
> > who's else section redefines the cpufreq_get function inhereited from
> > the header....
> >
> > I'm guessing no one ever ended up in the "else" section until now, and
> > that the header was added some time ago and no one caught this.
> > This patch worked for me to get rid of the compile time problems. I'm
> > having issues with the kernel, but as far as I can tell they are form
> > the Frame buffer and not because of this. If this assessment is correct
> > {the not needing this code anymore} then please pass this along so it
> > makes it into an upcoming release.
> >
> > --- linux-2.6.22.7/arch/arm/mach-sa1100/generic.c.orig 2007-09-24
> > 17:36:21.000000000 -0500
> > +++ linux-2.6.22.7/arch/arm/mach-sa1100/generic.c 2007-09-24
> > 17:40:02.000000000 -0500
> > @@ -107,15 +107,6 @@ unsigned int sa11x0_getspeed(unsigned in
> > return cclk_frequency_100khz[PPCR & 0xf] * 100;
> > }
> >
> > -#else
> > -/*
> > - * We still need to provide this so building without cpufreq works.
> > - */
> > -unsigned int cpufreq_get(unsigned int cpu)
> > -{
> > - return cclk_frequency_100khz[PPCR & 0xf] * 100;
> > -}
> > -EXPORT_SYMBOL(cpufreq_get);
> > #endif
> >
> > /*
>
> No. That code is required - the StrongARM 1100 framebuffer driver
> *needs* to know what the CPU frequency is so it can set the pixel
> clock divisor.
>
> The real problem is the silly people who added this to cpufreq.h:
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_FREQ
> unsigned int cpufreq_quick_get(unsigned int cpu);
> unsigned int cpufreq_get(unsigned int cpu);
> #else
> static inline unsigned int cpufreq_quick_get(unsigned int cpu)
> {
> return 0;
> }
> static inline unsigned int cpufreq_get(unsigned int cpu)
> {
> return 0;
> }
> #endif
>
> which utterly bogus.
Which came from ...
commit 184c44d2049c4db7ef6ec65794546954da2c6a0e
Author: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Dave Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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.
"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.
Cc's added.
Dave
--
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
