From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759965Ab3D3Jdi (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Apr 2013 05:33:38 -0400 Received: from eusmtp01.atmel.com ([212.144.249.243]:52388 "EHLO eusmtp01.atmel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752898Ab3D3Jdh (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Apr 2013 05:33:37 -0400 Message-ID: <517F8FF4.3050901@atmel.com> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 11:33:40 +0200 From: Nicolas Ferre Organization: atmel User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130329 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Marc Zyngier , linux-arm-kernel , Russell King - ARM Linux , Jon Medhurst , Stefano Stabellini CC: Linux Kernel list , "Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD" , Ludovic Desroches , Nicolas Pitre Subject: linux-next build error (at91) - use of bool in mach/arch.h X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.161.30.18] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Today I discovered an issue while building linux-next for at91: CC arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.o In file included from /home/nferre/dev/lnx_buid_test/arch/arm/mach-at91/at91sam9260_devices.c:12:0: /home/nferre/dev/lnx_buid_test/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h:46:2: error: expected specifier-qualifier-list before ‘bool’ It also applies to all non-DT at91 platforms (~ 6 machines). It seems to be caused by inclusion of commmit 4dbfa9a25367cfa91aec0e56d75a6905d3242cd3 (ARM: Enable selection of SMP operations at boot time) and its use of the "bool" type. In fact, we include asm/mach/arch.h file in our at91xxx_devices.c files and we include it as the first include directive. So, I am wondering if the best correction is to add the types.h header file in the asm/mach/arch.h file, like this: --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h @@ -8,6 +8,8 @@ * published by the Free Software Foundation. */ +#include + #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ struct tag; or if a better option would be to re-arrange the include directives in various at91xxx_devices.c files? Thanks, bye, -- Nicolas Ferre