From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sfjro@users.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [PATCH] aufs: Do not refer to AUFS_NAME in pr_fmt Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2012 22:15:33 +0900 Message-ID: <5487.1325510133@jrobl> References: <1325264773.13595.133.camel@deadeye> <9798.1325486722@jrobl> Return-path: Received: from mail04-md.ns.itscom.net ([175.177.155.114]:51762 "EHLO mail04-md.ns.itscom.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751749Ab2ABNPh (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jan 2012 08:15:37 -0500 Received: from scan03-mds.s.noc.itscom.net (scan03-md.ns.itscom.net [175.177.155.124]) by mail04-md-outgoing.ns.itscom.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EECB620471 for ; Mon, 2 Jan 2012 22:15:34 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-m68k-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org To: Thorsten Glaser Cc: aufs-users@lists.sourceforge.net, Debian kernel team , linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org Thorsten Glaser: > This doesn=E2=80=99t really differ from what I sent last, > does it? I am afraid you may not understand the important parts. - the order of the definition and sched.h. - no undef. > >+#ifdef __KERNEL__ > > Hrm. Is this needed? Indeed necessary since aufs_name.h is exported to userspace. > >+#define pr_fmt(fmt)=09AUFS_NAME " %s:%d:%s[%d]: " fmt,\ > >+=09=09__func__, __LINE__, current->comm, current->pid > > You need to #undef it first. It=E2=80=99s always defined, to just fmt. No, I don't think undef is a good approach. The purpose of my patch, or the difference from yours is to define pr_fmt first before all headers including sched.h. > >+#include > > You include aufs_name.h twice now, once in the Makefile, > once in the header. Shouldn=E2=80=99t one be enough? No, because aufs_type.h is exported to userspace. J. R. Okajima