lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch] sparc: fix build
On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 06:46:54PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> > --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> > @@ -20,9 +20,6 @@
> > #ifndef _LINUX_MEMCONTROL_H
> > #define _LINUX_MEMCONTROL_H
> >
> > -#include <linux/rcupdate.h>
> > -#include <linux/mm.h>
> > -
> > struct mem_cgroup;
> > struct page_cgroup;
> > struct page;
>
> This really should have been in a separate patch and extensively tested.
>
> Have we checked that every file which directly or indirectly includes
> memcontrol.h does not have an requirement for rcupdate.h and mm.h, where
> that requirement was satisfied only via this nested inclusion? For all
> architectures and for all config selections? Think not.
>
> Sadly, removal of nested includes is a *big* deal, and it takes quite a lot
> of time to get it all shaken down.
>
> If we can confirm that all files (.c and .h) which include memcontrol.h
> also directly include rcupdate.h and mm.h then we're _probably_ ok (modulo
> ordering issues).
>
> Otherwise we should perhaps be taking a second look at how to fix the sparc
> problem.

I've run allmodconfig builds on a bunch of target, FWIW (essentially the
same patch). Note that these includes are recent addition caused by
added inline function that had since then become a define. So while I
agree with your comments in general, in _this_ case it's pretty safe.

Commit that had done it is 3062fc67dad01b1d2a15d58c709eff946389eca4
and switch to #define is 60c12b1202a60eabb1c61317e5d2678fcea9893f (BTW,
that warranted mentioning in changelog of the latter).


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-02-13 04:01    [W:0.104 / U:0.052 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site