* Re: [PATCH] remove unused includes and misleading comments from scsi_lib.c
[not found] ` <20021120084709.A18453@eng2.beaverton.ibm.com>
@ 2002-11-20 17:50 ` Christoph Hellwig
2002-11-20 19:10 ` Patrick Mansfield
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2002-11-20 17:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patrick Mansfield; +Cc: James.Bottomley, linux-scsi, linux-kernel
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 08:47:09AM -0800, Patrick Mansfield wrote:
> I had to add back the smp_lock.h include to compile with CONFIG_PREEMPT,
> as kernel_locked was not defined and is used by in_atomic().
Bah. Any chance you could fix the header declaring in_atomic() to pull
in smp_lock.h by itself instead?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] remove unused includes and misleading comments from scsi_lib.c
2002-11-20 17:50 ` [PATCH] remove unused includes and misleading comments from scsi_lib.c Christoph Hellwig
@ 2002-11-20 19:10 ` Patrick Mansfield
2002-11-20 19:25 ` J.E.J. Bottomley
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Patrick Mansfield @ 2002-11-20 19:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christoph Hellwig, James.Bottomley, linux-scsi, linux-kernel
On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 06:50:48PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2002 at 08:47:09AM -0800, Patrick Mansfield wrote:
> > I had to add back the smp_lock.h include to compile with CONFIG_PREEMPT,
> > as kernel_locked was not defined and is used by in_atomic().
>
> Bah. Any chance you could fix the header declaring in_atomic() to pull
> in smp_lock.h by itself instead?
It is in hardirq.h, arch specific, 11 of the 20 hardirq.h files would
need the change (they reference kernel_locked) to include smp_lock.h.
665 files include smp_lock.h
89 files include hardirq.h
32 files include both
So, should I change the arch hardirq.h files to include smp_lock.h,
or just add smp_lock.h to scsi_lib.c?
-- Patrick Mansfield
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] remove unused includes and misleading comments from scsi_lib.c
2002-11-20 19:10 ` Patrick Mansfield
@ 2002-11-20 19:25 ` J.E.J. Bottomley
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: J.E.J. Bottomley @ 2002-11-20 19:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Patrick Mansfield
Cc: Christoph Hellwig, James.Bottomley, linux-scsi, linux-kernel
patmans@us.ibm.com said:
> It is in hardirq.h, arch specific, 11 of the 20 hardirq.h files would
> need the change (they reference kernel_locked) to include smp_lock.h.
> 665 files include smp_lock.h 89 files include hardirq.h 32 files
> include both
> So, should I change the arch hardirq.h files to include smp_lock.h, or
> just add smp_lock.h to scsi_lib.c?
That magnitude of change needs to go in through the header files project.
I'll just apply the smp_lock.h in scsi_lib fix to the scsi tree for now. They
can always take it out again for the proper fix.
James
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-11-20 19:18 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20021117235449.B9824@lst.de>
[not found] ` <20021120084709.A18453@eng2.beaverton.ibm.com>
2002-11-20 17:50 ` [PATCH] remove unused includes and misleading comments from scsi_lib.c Christoph Hellwig
2002-11-20 19:10 ` Patrick Mansfield
2002-11-20 19:25 ` J.E.J. Bottomley
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®