From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756384Ab0CKWbR (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:31:17 -0500 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:56835 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753279Ab0CKWbP (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:31:15 -0500 Message-ID: <4B996FAE.3030102@kernel.org> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 07:33:18 +0900 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100228 SUSE/3.0.3-3.1 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexey Dobriyan CC: Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , lkml , Lee Schermerhorn , Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [RFC] remove implicit slab.h inclusion from percpu.h References: <4B990496.4020002@kernel.org> <20100311174821.GA5123@x200> In-Reply-To: <20100311174821.GA5123@x200> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.3 (hera.kernel.org [127.0.0.1]); Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:30:20 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello, On 03/12/2010 02:48 AM, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: >> So, what do you guys think? Probably-the-right-thing-to-do >544 file >> patch or somewhat-ugly-but-let's-worry-about-it-tommorrow two file >> patch? > > You can include slab.h only for UP case. > > Since everyone tests on allmodconfig which has SMP=y, configuration > will be more strict wrt headers, and compile breakages amount > negligible. But that wouldn't change anything about having to do an oneshot huge change, right? And, if we're gonna do that anyway, I think it would be better to remove the implicit dependency for UP case too so that for example slab.h in this case doesn't have to do ifdef on CONFIG_SMP before using percpu accessors. Thanks. -- tejun