Re: [PATCH 07/21] ARM: tegra: unify tegra_idle_device definitions

2013-04-23 Thread Joseph Lo
On Wed, 2013-04-24 at 06:04 +0800, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On 04/23/2013 08:57 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Tuesday 23 April 2013, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > >> the patch sounds good but I think the side effect of the consolidation > >> patchset [1] fixed that. > >> > >> You can find these fixes in

Re: [PATCH 07/21] ARM: tegra: unify tegra_idle_device definitions

2013-04-23 Thread Daniel Lezcano
On 04/23/2013 08:57 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 23 April 2013, Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> the patch sounds good but I think the side effect of the consolidation >> patchset [1] fixed that. >> >> You can find these fixes in Rafael's tree: >> >> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/ra

Re: [PATCH 07/21] ARM: tegra: unify tegra_idle_device definitions

2013-04-23 Thread Arnd Bergmann
On Tuesday 23 April 2013, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > the patch sounds good but I think the side effect of the consolidation > patchset [1] fixed that. > > You can find these fixes in Rafael's tree: > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/commit/?h=linux-next&id=4c637b217

Re: [PATCH 07/21] ARM: tegra: unify tegra_idle_device definitions

2013-04-23 Thread Daniel Lezcano
On 04/23/2013 06:30 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > The three tegra variants (20, 30, 114) each define their own per-cpu > variable for tegra_idle_device, which causes link errors when you > build the kernel for more than one of them: > > cpuidle-tegra30.o:(.discard+0x0): multiple definition of > `__p