Re: [PATCH] smp_call_function_single() should be a macro on UP

From: Al Viro <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 22:29:46 +0100

> ... or we end up with header include order problems from hell.
> E.g. on m68k this is 100% fatal - local_irq_enable() there
> wants preempt_count(), which wants task_struct fields, which
> we won't have when we are in smp.h pulled from sched.h.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <[email protected]>

Acked-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>

I was going to fix the sparc64/UP build fallout by
adding linux/kernel.h include to linux/smp.h but that
definitely would not handle this m68k case at all.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH] smp_call_function_single() should be a macro on UP
    • From: Ben Dooks <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] smp_call_function_single() should be a macro on UP
    • From: Al Viro <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Hibernation considerations
• Next by Date: Re: v2.6.21.5-rt19 (sched_getaffinity?)
• Previous by thread: [PATCH] smp_call_function_single() should be a macro on UP
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] smp_call_function_single() should be a macro on UP
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]