From: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Cc: Zimny Lech <napohybelskurwysynom2010@gmail.com>,
linux-next@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Linus <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for November 17
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 15:24:51 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CE46443.2000002@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101118101459.472d540b.sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
On 11/17/10 15:14, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 09:59:20 -0800 Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>> Why was #include <linux/smp_lock.h> removed from <linux/hardirq.h> ?
>>
>> I added #include <linux/smp_lock.h> to i387.h, but them mm/filemap.c build fails
>> with the same error:
>>
>> linux-next-20101117/mm/filemap.c: In function 'iov_iter_copy_from_user_atomic':
>> linux-next-20101117/mm/filemap.c:1936: error: implicit declaration of function 'kernel_locked'
>
> Was this fixed before Linus took that patch? Also, the #include of
This build error was in linux-next of NOV. 17. What mainline base did it use?
I don't exactly know how to answer your question...
> linux/smp_lock.h in linux/hardirq.h was the only line between #ifdef
> CONFIG_PREEMPT and #endif ... was this patch even reviewed?
>
> Maybe (after it was reviewed) it should have been given more time in
> linux-next before being merged.
--
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-17 23:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-17 3:09 linux-next: Tree for November 17 Stephen Rothwell
2010-11-17 17:23 ` Zimny Lech
2010-11-17 17:59 ` Randy Dunlap
2010-11-17 23:14 ` Stephen Rothwell
2010-11-17 23:24 ` Randy Dunlap [this message]
2010-11-18 0:16 ` Stephen Rothwell
2010-11-17 22:53 ` Zimny Lech
2010-11-17 23:09 ` Randy Dunlap
2010-11-17 23:38 ` [PATCH -next] staging: clearpad_tm1217 depends on INPUT Randy Dunlap
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-11-17 8:53 linux-next: Tree for November 17 Stephen Rothwell
2008-11-17 7:06 Stephen Rothwell
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=4CE46443.2000002@oracle.com \
--to=randy.dunlap@oracle.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=napohybelskurwysynom2010@gmail.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).