gcc4 complains about multiple definitions of irq_affinity--I think the one in
arch/ia64/kernel/irq.c is the redundant one since the array is also defined
in kernel/irq/manage.c.
Building with gcc4 generates a bunch of warnings too, saying that qualifiers
on function return types are being ignored (in particular the ones from
__ia64_get_io_port_base and the ones having to do with mmu_context_t being
volatile). Should we use attribute(const) for get_io_port_base? What about
for the mmu_context_t functions?
Signed-off-by: Jesse Barnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Jesse
===== arch/ia64/kernel/irq.c 1.55 vs edited =====
--- 1.55/arch/ia64/kernel/irq.c 2005-01-22 15:54:25 -08:00
+++ edited/arch/ia64/kernel/irq.c 2005-03-14 11:24:20 -08:00
@@ -97,7 +97,6 @@
cpumask_t __cacheline_aligned pending_irq_cpumask[NR_IRQS];
static unsigned long pending_irq_redir[BITS_TO_LONGS(NR_IRQS)];
-static cpumask_t irq_affinity [NR_IRQS] = { [0 ... NR_IRQS-1] = CPU_MASK_ALL };
static char irq_redir [NR_IRQS]; // = { [0 ... NR_IRQS-1] = 1 };
void set_irq_affinity_info (unsigned int irq, int hwid, int redir)
