From: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
geert@linux-m68k.org, rdunlap@xenotime.net,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
gleb@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jan 25 (net/sock.h, jump_label, memcg)
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 01:47:24 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F21C9EC.60009@parallels.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120127084622.a16b0f43e6fcbd029cb1f923@canb.auug.org.au>
On 01/27/2012 01:46 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 00:31:13 +0400 Glauber Costa<glommer@parallels.com> wrote:
>>
>> On the specifics of this bug, I verified this config compiles okay in
>> your tree + my patches at the day I last sent them. I also verified it
>> breaks on the tree today.
>>
>> The reason seems to be that some other patch tweaked with the header
>> files in an unrelated patch, and the static_branch definition that was
>> getting to us in sock.h, is no longer getting there.
>>
>> Including it explicitly fixes it here. I will again pass through a
>> battery of randconfigs on my own, and send you a fix.
>
> Which is one of the reasons we have Rule 1 in Documentation/SubmitChecklist:
>
> 1: If you use a facility then #include the file that defines/declares
> that facility. Don't depend on other header files pulling in ones
> that you use.
>
I understand that. I wasn't saying I am not to blame, just why this
wasn't catched in any test of mine before.
The fix is on its way.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@parallels.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
<rdunlap@xenotime.net>, <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <gleb@redhat.com>,
<netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jan 25 (net/sock.h, jump_label, memcg)
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 01:47:24 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F21C9EC.60009@parallels.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120127084622.a16b0f43e6fcbd029cb1f923@canb.auug.org.au>
On 01/27/2012 01:46 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 00:31:13 +0400 Glauber Costa<glommer@parallels.com> wrote:
>>
>> On the specifics of this bug, I verified this config compiles okay in
>> your tree + my patches at the day I last sent them. I also verified it
>> breaks on the tree today.
>>
>> The reason seems to be that some other patch tweaked with the header
>> files in an unrelated patch, and the static_branch definition that was
>> getting to us in sock.h, is no longer getting there.
>>
>> Including it explicitly fixes it here. I will again pass through a
>> battery of randconfigs on my own, and send you a fix.
>
> Which is one of the reasons we have Rule 1 in Documentation/SubmitChecklist:
>
> 1: If you use a facility then #include the file that defines/declares
> that facility. Don't depend on other header files pulling in ones
> that you use.
>
I understand that. I wasn't saying I am not to blame, just why this
wasn't catched in any test of mine before.
The fix is on its way.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-26 21:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-25 3:19 linux-next: Tree for Jan 25 Stephen Rothwell
2012-01-25 19:07 ` linux-next: Tree for Jan 25 (net/sock.h, jump_label, memcg) Randy Dunlap
2012-01-26 17:18 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2012-01-26 18:43 ` David Miller
2012-01-26 20:31 ` Glauber Costa
2012-01-26 20:31 ` Glauber Costa
2012-01-26 21:46 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-01-26 21:46 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-01-26 21:47 ` Glauber Costa [this message]
2012-01-26 21:47 ` Glauber Costa
2012-01-25 21:52 ` [PATCH -next] uwb & wusb: fix kconfig error Randy Dunlap
2012-01-27 23:47 ` [PATCH -next] uwb & wusb & usb wireless controllers: fix kconfig error & build errors Randy Dunlap
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4F21C9EC.60009@parallels.com \
--to=glommer@parallels.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.