On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 05:01:11PM -0300, Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 03:02:14PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > From: Greg KH <gre...@linuxfoundation.org>
> >
> [...]
> > --- a/arch/arm/vfp/vfpmodule.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/vfp/vfpmodule.c
> > @@ -412,6 +412,12 @@ static int vfp_pm_suspend(void)
> >
> > /* disable, just in case */
> > fmxr(FPEXC, fmrx(FPEXC) & ~FPEXC_EN);
> > + } else if (vfp_current_hw_state[ti->cpu]) {
> > +#ifndef CONFIG_SMP
> > + fmxr(FPEXC, fpexc | FPEXC_EN);
> > + vfp_save_state(vfp_current_hw_state[ti->cpu], fpexc);
> > + fmxr(FPEXC, fpexc);
> > +#endif
>
> This fails to build on 3.0:
>
> linux-stable/arch/arm/vfp/vfpmodule.c: In function 'vfp_pm_suspend':
> linux-stable/arch/arm/vfp/vfpmodule.c:415:13: error: 'vfp_current_hw_state'
> undeclared (first use in this function)
> linux-stable/arch/arm/vfp/vfpmodule.c:415:13: note: each undeclared
> identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
> make[3]: *** [arch/arm/vfp/vfpmodule.o] Error 1
>
> In 3.0, vfp_current_hw_state was still named last_VFP_context, so I
> think just renaming should be enough to fix this.
I'll remove the patch as it probably just shouldn't be there, right? If
you think it should be in 3.0-stable, can you please send me a fixed up
patch that you have tested that it at least builds properly?
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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/
