Le 23/03/2021 à 07:21, heying (H) a écrit :
Dear Christophe,
在 2021/3/18 10:28, heying (H) 写道:
在 2021/3/17 19:16, Christophe Leroy 写道:
Le 17/03/2021 à 11:34, He Ying a écrit :
We found these warnings in arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c as follows:
warning: symbol 'decrementer_max' was not declared. Should it be static?
warning: symbol 'rtc_lock' was not declared. Should it be static?
warning: symbol 'dtl_consumer' was not declared. Should it be static?
Declare 'decrementer_max' in arch/powerpc/include/asm/time.h. And include
proper header in which 'rtc_lock' is declared. Move 'dtl_consumer'
definition behind "include <asm/dtl.h>" because 'dtl_consumer' is declared
there.
Reported-by: Hulk Robot <hul...@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: He Ying <heyin...@huawei.com>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/time.h | 1 +
arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c | 7 +++----
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/time.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/time.h
index 8dd3cdb25338..2cd2b50bedda 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/time.h
+++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/time.h
@@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ extern unsigned long tb_ticks_per_jiffy;
extern unsigned long tb_ticks_per_usec;
extern unsigned long tb_ticks_per_sec;
extern struct clock_event_device decrementer_clockevent;
+extern u64 decrementer_max;
extern void generic_calibrate_decr(void);
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c
index b67d93a609a2..409967713ca6 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c
@@ -55,6 +55,7 @@
#include <linux/sched/cputime.h>
#include <linux/sched/clock.h>
#include <linux/processor.h>
+#include <linux/mc146818rtc.h>
I don't think that's the good place. It has no link to powerpc, it is only by chance that it has
the same name.
As rtc_lock is defined in powerpc time.c, I think you should declare it in
powerpc asm/time.h
My first thought was the same as yours. I tried to add declaration in powerpc asm/time.h, but got
a compiling error:
drivers/rtc/rtc-vr41xx.c:75:24: error: static declaration of ‘rtc_lock’ follows non-static
declaration
static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(rtc_lock);
In file included from ./arch/powerpc/include/asm/delay.h:7:0,
from ./arch/powerpc/include/asm/io.h:33,
from ./include/linux/io.h:13,
from drivers/rtc/rtc-vr41xx.c:11:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/time.h:25:19: note: previous declaration of
‘rtc_lock’ was here
extern spinlock_t rtc_lock;
There's a conflict. Perhaps I can rename it in drivers/rtc/rtc-vr41xx.c.
But I find an existing declaration in linux/mc146818rtc.h and there's only one definition for
'rtc_lock' in powerpc.
There's some includes of mc146818rtc.h in powperc. I wonder they point to the same thing. But I'm
not very sure
because the header's name looks a bit strange.
How about including mc146818rtc.h in powperpc kernel/time.c? May I have your
opinions please?
As I said, mc146818rtc.h is not related to powerpc, and if it works that's just chance, and there is
no certainty that it will still work in the future.
If you can't find a clean solution, it is better to leave the warning.
Christophe
