From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Kara Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree (akpm tree related) Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 10:22:44 +0100 Message-ID: <20130304092244.GB17223@quack.suse.cz> References: <20130304142821.b61bd9800c4ea35331829a79@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:60801 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756130Ab3CDJWq (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Mar 2013 04:22:46 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130304142821.b61bd9800c4ea35331829a79@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kara On Mon 04-03-13 14:28:21, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi all, > > After merging the final tree, today's linux-next build (arm defconfig) > failed like this: > > kernel/built-in.o: In function `console_unlock': > cpu_pm.c:(.text+0x4418): undefined reference to `__bad_udelay' > > Caused by commit 4df7323a125f ("printk: avoid softlockups in > console_unlock()") which added > > ndelay(max_interrupt_disabled_duration() / 2); > > to console_unlock() which can be a 2.5 second delay ... and the maximum > delayed allowed by udelay (at least in this build) is 2ms. Bah, one always learns. Didn't know there's some max limit on ndelay(). I'll replace that with a while loop or something like that. Thanks for report! Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR