From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: linux-next: sched tree build warning Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 10:27:06 +1000 Message-ID: <20090421102706.e19240a0.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="PGP-SHA1"; boundary="Signature=_Tue__21_Apr_2009_10_27_06_+1000_ZNmn3WYjrZD4x0tZ" Return-path: Received: from chilli.pcug.org.au ([203.10.76.44]:59035 "EHLO smtps.tip.net.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752211AbZDUA1P (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Apr 2009 20:27:15 -0400 Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Gautham R Shenoy , Rusty Russell --Signature=_Tue__21_Apr_2009_10_27_06_+1000_ZNmn3WYjrZD4x0tZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi all, Today's linux-next build (powerpc ppc64_defconfig) produced this new warning: kernel/sched.c: In function 'find_new_ilb': kernel/sched.c:4355: warning: passing argument 1 of '__first_cpu' from inco= mpatible pointer type Possibly caused by commit f711f6090a81cbd396b63de90f415d33f563af9b ("sched: Nominate idle load balancer from a semi-idle package") from the sched tree. Should this call to first_cpu be cpumask_first? --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/ --Signature=_Tue__21_Apr_2009_10_27_06_+1000_ZNmn3WYjrZD4x0tZ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkntEtoACgkQjjKRsyhoI8wl8ACff1n8IOg/kPqc2CNVRbs2HweV GAcAoJdBaxXACH8eYi9N4BaJYIjoJh3t =AbXe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature=_Tue__21_Apr_2009_10_27_06_+1000_ZNmn3WYjrZD4x0tZ--