Re: [PATCH] implicit declaration of function `page_cache_release'

Olaf Hering
2005-08-06T15:01:11Z

On Sat, Aug 06, David S. Miller wrote:

> From: Benoit Boissinot <bboissin@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 21:18:38 +0200
>
> > On 8/5/05, Olaf Hering <olh@suse.de> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 05, Benoit Boissinot wrote:
> > >
> > > Why does it need swap.h? Do the users of pgtable.h rely on swap.h?
> > >
> > sparc is the only architecture to do that, it looks like it uses it
> > for boot time linking (BTFIXUP_*). I don't know anything about sparc,
> > so i can't fix it.
> >
> > (adding sparclinux@vger.kernel.org to the cc list)
>
> It needs to have the swp_entry_t type fully visible in pgtable.h,
> we can't work around this using macros.

So the patch should be reverted? Its only for CONFIG_SWAP=n, rather
unusual for KDE/GNOME tainted workstations...