On Wednesday 22 August 2012, Shilimkar, Santosh wrote:
> Was just thinking whether we should just take care of it at
> core cpuidle level itself. Will below be enough to kill the build
> error what you mentioned in the change log ?
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpuidle/coupled.c b/drivers/cpuidle/coupled.c
> index 2c9bf26..df34534 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpuidle/coupled.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpuidle/coupled.c
> @@ -314,7 +314,9 @@ static void cpuidle_coupled_poke(int cpu)
> struct call_single_data *csd = &per_cpu(cpuidle_coupled_poke_cb, cpu);
>
> if (!cpumask_test_and_set_cpu(cpu, &cpuidle_coupled_poked_mask))
> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> __smp_call_function_single(cpu, csd, 0);
> +#endif
> }
>
That would work, but isn't the entire concept of the cpuidle-coupled driver
dependent on SMP? If this driver makes no sense on UP, I think we should
not attempt to build it.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
