From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] sysctl: Separate the binary sysctl logic into it's own file. Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 13:10:02 +0100 Message-ID: <200911061310.02785.arnd@arndb.de> References: <200911061004.01007.borntraeger@de.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.187]:64017 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757312AbZKFMKN (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Nov 2009 07:10:13 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: Christian Borntraeger , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 06 November 2009, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Christian Borntraeger writes: > > > Am Freitag 06 November 2009 01:41:44 schrieb Eric W. Biederman: > >> From: Eric W. Biederman > >> > >> In preparation for more invasive cleanups separate the core > >> binary sysctl logic into it's own file. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Eric W. Biederman > > > > Hmm, with your patches on Linus git I get the following on s390: > > > > kernel/sysctl_binary.c: In function 'SYSC_sysctl': > > kernel/sysctl_binary.c:126: error: implicit declaration of function > > 'lock_kernel' > > kernel/sysctl_binary.c:129: error: implicit declaration of function > > 'unlock_kernel' > > Bah. A missing smp_lock.h. BTW, there is a patch in the kill-the-BKL tree to push down the BKL further into the sysctl handlers. It may be a good idea to put that into your tree, or to redo the same thing there differently, since you already have a patch series touching this area. Arnd <><