From: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To: Thorsten Glaser <tg@mirbsd.de>
Cc: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org,
Debian Kernel Team <debian-kernel@lists.debian.org>
Subject: Re: aufs vs. m68k conflict, please advice
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 19:49:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111217184915.GL24496@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSM.4.64L.1112171426140.856@herc.mirbsd.org>
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 02:28:35PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Ben Hutchings dixit:
>
> >why other architectures get away with it. Maybe they just don't use
> >pr_*() in headers.
>
> Maybe something like this?
>
> #define ack_bad_irq(irq) do { \
> pr_crit("unexpected IRQ trap at vector %02x\n", \
> (unsigned int)(irq)); \
> } while (/* CONSTCOND */ 0)
>
> This would defer pr_crit expansion to when the static inline
> function was actually used.
>
> Just an idea of the moment,
IMHO the problem is that aufs provides an incomplete definition of
pr_fmt. Either it should define AUFS_NAME on the commandline, too, or
should define pr_fmt in an aufs header (or a .c file) #included after
all other headers and only when AUFS_NAME is defined, too.
The ugly thing about aufs' pr_fmt being already there when ack_bad_irq
is defined is, that the message printed by the pr_crit suddenly looks
aufs specific which it clearly isn't. So it should better make sure that
the definition isn't available to ack_bad_irq.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-12-17 18:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-16 14:42 aufs vs. m68k conflict, please advice Thorsten Glaser
2011-12-16 16:48 ` Ben Hutchings
2011-12-16 17:15 ` Thorsten Glaser
2011-12-17 14:28 ` Thorsten Glaser
2011-12-17 16:24 ` Thorsten Glaser
2011-12-17 16:29 ` Ben Hutchings
2011-12-17 18:49 ` Uwe Kleine-König [this message]
2011-12-17 19:00 ` Thorsten Glaser
2011-12-17 19:57 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-12-17 20:09 ` [PATCH] m68k/irq: don't use pr_crit in an header Uwe Kleine-König
2011-12-17 21:19 ` Thorsten Glaser
2011-12-18 10:32 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2011-12-18 10:42 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-12-18 17:06 ` Joe Perches
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=20111217184915.GL24496@pengutronix.de \
--to=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
--cc=debian-kernel@lists.debian.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tg@mirbsd.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox