Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 18 Nov 2010 11:04:09 -0800 | From | Randy Dunlap <> | Subject | Re: [build failure] Re: BKL: remove extraneous #include <smp_lock.h> |
| |
On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 20:02:05 +0100 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Linus Torvalds > > <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote: > > > > > > How painful would it be to move lock_depth into thread_struct? I guess > > > we don't have anything that cares about structure offsets in assembly > > > for that thing. I should just try. > > > > Gaah, the only generic field there is the restart_block, so we'd have > > to hide it there, or then add it to each architecture. So scratch > > that. > > > > I guess this is the simplest approach. > > > > Linus > > > include/linux/hardirq.h | 1 + > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/hardirq.h b/include/linux/hardirq.h > > index 714da7e..32f9fd6 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/hardirq.h > > +++ b/include/linux/hardirq.h > > @@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ > > #define in_nmi() (preempt_count() & NMI_MASK) > > > > #if defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT) && defined(CONFIG_BKL) > > +# include <linux/sched.h> > > # define PREEMPT_INATOMIC_BASE (current->lock_depth >= 0) > > #else > > # define PREEMPT_INATOMIC_BASE 0 > > Hey, i will quote this patch in the future, when you flame me about some ugly > compatibility hack ;-) > > I guess it will all go away with CONFIG_BKL so we dont really care so deeply. I'll > test it.
Ingo, I built it with your posted config file.
--- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |