From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [patch] net/core/filter.c: Fix build error Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 21:12:56 +0200 Message-ID: <20110526191256.GA4553@elte.hu> References: <20110526123153.GA16002@elte.hu> <1306423866.16087.10.camel@Joe-Laptop> <20110526.143843.205897228685761536.davem@davemloft.net> <20110526190939.GC3476@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110526190939.GC3476@elte.hu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Cc: joe@perches.com, greearb@candelatech.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org * Ingo Molnar wrote: > So no, i don't think your patch is the real solution. [...] s/real/complete Note, your patch solves a real problem: the ratelimited WARN_ON()s should not be in the generic bug.h header, that's just broken. I just don't think this is the only problem: the other problem was what hid the bug in the first place, the spurious ratelimit.h inclusion via net.h. Thanks, Ingo From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:58069 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757985Ab1EZTND (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 May 2011 15:13:03 -0400 Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 21:12:56 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [patch] net/core/filter.c: Fix build error Message-ID: <20110526191256.GA4553@elte.hu> References: <20110526123153.GA16002@elte.hu> <1306423866.16087.10.camel@Joe-Laptop> <20110526.143843.205897228685761536.davem@davemloft.net> <20110526190939.GC3476@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110526190939.GC3476@elte.hu> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: David Miller Cc: joe@perches.com, greearb@candelatech.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, netdev@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20110526191256.KM-KRXM_iK9ASDnsaEivMgSo2D46i-RKBgGy1bemDUE@z> * Ingo Molnar wrote: > So no, i don't think your patch is the real solution. [...] s/real/complete Note, your patch solves a real problem: the ratelimited WARN_ON()s should not be in the generic bug.h header, that's just broken. I just don't think this is the only problem: the other problem was what hid the bug in the first place, the spurious ratelimit.h inclusion via net.h. Thanks, Ingo