linux-next build error (at91) - use of bool in mach/arch.h

linux-next build error (at91) - use of bool in mach/arch.h

[Nicolas Ferre]

Hi,

Today I discovered an issue while building linux-next for at91:

  CC      arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.o
In file included from /home/nferre/dev/lnx_buid_test/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c:12:0:
/home/nferre/dev/lnx_buid_test/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h:46:2: error: expected specifier-qualifier-list before ?bool?

It also applies to all non-DT at91 platforms (~ 6 machines).

It seems to be caused by inclusion of commmit
4dbfa9a25367cfa91aec0e56d75a6905d3242cd3 (ARM: Enable selection of 
SMP operations at boot time) and its use of the "bool" type.

In fact, we include asm/mach/arch.h file in our at91xxx_devices.c files and
we include it as the first include directive.

So, I am wondering if the best correction is to add the types.h header file
in the asm/mach/arch.h file, like this:

--- a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
+++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
@@ -8,6 +8,8 @@
  * published by the Free Software Foundation.
  */
 
+#include <linux/types.h>
+
 #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
 
 struct tag;

or if a better option would be to re-arrange the include directives in
various at91xxx_devices.c files?

Thanks, bye,
-- 
Nicolas Ferre

linux-next build error (at91) - use of bool in mach/arch.h

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> wrote:
> So, I am wondering if the best correction is to add the types.h header file
> in the asm/mach/arch.h file, like this:
>
> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
> @@ -8,6 +8,8 @@
>   * published by the Free Software Foundation.
>   */
>
> +#include <linux/types.h>
> +
>  #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>
>  struct tag;
>
> or if a better option would be to re-arrange the include directives in
> various at91xxx_devices.c files?

Include files should be self-contained, so asm/mach/arch.h is the right place.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert at linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

linux-next build error (at91) - use of bool in mach/arch.h

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> wrote:
> > So, I am wondering if the best correction is to add the types.h header file
> > in the asm/mach/arch.h file, like this:
> >
> > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
> > @@ -8,6 +8,8 @@
> >   * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> >   */
> >
> > +#include <linux/types.h>
> > +
> >  #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
> >
> >  struct tag;
> >
> > or if a better option would be to re-arrange the include directives in
> > various at91xxx_devices.c files?
> 
> Include files should be self-contained, so asm/mach/arch.h is the right place.

Nicolas,
are you happy to come up with a proper patch to fix the issue?

[PATCH] ARM: add the "bool" type definition to asm/mach/arch.h

[Nicolas Ferre]

Addition of boolean field to machine_desc structure in commit
4dbfa9a25367cfa91aec0e56d75a6905d3242cd3 (ARM: Enable selection of
SMP operations at boot time) was triggering compilation errors like:

  CC      arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.o
In file included from arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c:12:0:
arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h:46:2: error: expected specifier-qualifier-list before "bool"

So, we add the definition of "bool" by including the linux/types.h
file to asm/mach/arch.h and make it self-contained.

Signed-off-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
---
 arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
index af8c54c..75bf079 100644
--- a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
+++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
@@ -8,6 +8,8 @@
  * published by the Free Software Foundation.
  */
 
+#include <linux/types.h>
+
 #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
 
 struct tag;
-- 
1.8.0

linux-next build error (at91) - use of bool in mach/arch.h

[Nicolas Ferre]

On 04/30/2013 01:58 PM, Stefano Stabellini :
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> wrote:
>>> So, I am wondering if the best correction is to add the types.h header file
>>> in the asm/mach/arch.h file, like this:
>>>
>>> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
>>> @@ -8,6 +8,8 @@
>>>   * published by the Free Software Foundation.
>>>   */
>>>
>>> +#include <linux/types.h>
>>> +
>>>  #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>>>
>>>  struct tag;
>>>
>>> or if a better option would be to re-arrange the include directives in
>>> various at91xxx_devices.c files?
>>
>> Include files should be self-contained, so asm/mach/arch.h is the right place.
> 
> Nicolas,
> are you happy to come up with a proper patch to fix the issue?

Yep, sent now.

Bye,
-- 
Nicolas Ferre

[PATCH] ARM: add the "bool" type definition to asm/mach/arch.h

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> Addition of boolean field to machine_desc structure in commit
> 4dbfa9a25367cfa91aec0e56d75a6905d3242cd3 (ARM: Enable selection of
> SMP operations at boot time) was triggering compilation errors like:
> 
>   CC      arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.o
> In file included from arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c:12:0:
> arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h:46:2: error: expected specifier-qualifier-list before "bool"
> 
> So, we add the definition of "bool" by including the linux/types.h
> file to asm/mach/arch.h and make it self-contained.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>

Acked-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>


>  arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
> index af8c54c..75bf079 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
> @@ -8,6 +8,8 @@
>   * published by the Free Software Foundation.
>   */
>  
> +#include <linux/types.h>
> +
>  #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>  
>  struct tag;
> -- 
> 1.8.0
> 

linux-next build error (at91) - use of bool in mach/arch.h

[Nicolas Pitre]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:

> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> wrote:
> > > So, I am wondering if the best correction is to add the types.h header file
> > > in the asm/mach/arch.h file, like this:
> > >
> > > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
> > > @@ -8,6 +8,8 @@
> > >   * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> > >   */
> > >
> > > +#include <linux/types.h>
> > > +
> > >  #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
> > >
> > >  struct tag;
> > >
> > > or if a better option would be to re-arrange the include directives in
> > > various at91xxx_devices.c files?
> > 
> > Include files should be self-contained, so asm/mach/arch.h is the right place.
> 
> Nicolas,
> are you happy to come up with a proper patch to fix the issue?

I'd prefer if you just folded the above include into the original patch, 
unless this has been pulled already.


Nicolas

linux-next build error (at91) - use of bool in mach/arch.h

[Stefano Stabellini]

On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> wrote:
> > > > So, I am wondering if the best correction is to add the types.h header file
> > > > in the asm/mach/arch.h file, like this:
> > > >
> > > > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
> > > > @@ -8,6 +8,8 @@
> > > >   * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> > > >   */
> > > >
> > > > +#include <linux/types.h>
> > > > +
> > > >  #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
> > > >
> > > >  struct tag;
> > > >
> > > > or if a better option would be to re-arrange the include directives in
> > > > various at91xxx_devices.c files?
> > > 
> > > Include files should be self-contained, so asm/mach/arch.h is the right place.
> > 
> > Nicolas,
> > are you happy to come up with a proper patch to fix the issue?
> 
> I'd prefer if you just folded the above include into the original patch, 
> unless this has been pulled already.

No, I'll exploit the opportunity to resend the patch series and issue a
PULL request for the arm-soc tree.