* 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®