Re: [RFC patch 07/18] Trace clock core

Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-11-07T18:16:54Z

* 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