From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>
Subject: Re: [RFC patch 07/18] Trace clock core
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 13:16:50 -0500
Message-ID: <20081107181650.GI22134@Krystal>
References: <20081107052336.652868737@polymtl.ca> <20081107053349.699011457@polymtl.ca> <20081106215256.a9f01ec4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20081107061643.GA798@Krystal> <20081106222656.8e35d9d5.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20081107161237.GA22134@Krystal> <20081107081939.4bcdf25b.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from tomts20.bellnexxia.net ([209.226.175.74]:49109 "EHLO
	tomts20-srv.bellnexxia.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751080AbYKGSQy (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 7 Nov 2008 13:16:54 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20081107081939.4bcdf25b.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-arch.vger.kernel.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org

* Andrew Morton (akpm@linux-foundation.org) wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 11:12:38 -0500 Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca> wrote:
> 
> > * Andrew Morton (akpm@linux-foundation.org) wrote:
> > > On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 01:16:43 -0500 Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > Is there something we should be fixing in m68k?
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, but I fear it's going to go deep into include hell :-(
> > > 
> > > Oh, OK.  I thought that the comment meant that m68k's on_each_cpu()
> > > behaves differently at runtime from other architectures (and wrongly).
> > > 
> > > If it's just some compile-time #include snafu then that's far less
> > > of a concern.
> > > 
> > 
> > Should I simply remove this comment then ?
> > 
> 
> umm, it could perhaps be clarified - mention that it's needed for an
> include order problem.
> 
> It's a bit odd.  Surely by the time we've included these:
> 
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/init.h>
> +#include <linux/delay.h>
> +#include <linux/timer.h>
> +#include <linux/workqueue.h>
> +#include <linux/cpu.h>
> +#include <linux/timex.h>
> +#include <linux/bitops.h>
> +#include <linux/trace-clock.h>
> +#include <linux/smp.h>
> 
> someone has already included sched.h, and the definition of
> _LINUX_SCHED_H will cause the later inclusion to not change anything?
> 

Maybe now it's ok, but in the past, sched.h was not included..
surprisingly.

I'll just write a clearer comment.

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68