Re: [PATCH 01/11] sysctl: Separate the binary sysctl logic into it's own file.

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Friday 06 November 2009, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > Am Freitag 06 November 2009 01:41:44 schrieb Eric W. Biederman:
> >> From: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> 
> >> In preparation for more invasive cleanups separate the core
> >> binary sysctl logic into it's own file.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Hmm, with your patches on Linus git I get the following on s390:
> >
> > kernel/sysctl_binary.c: In function 'SYSC_sysctl':
> > kernel/sysctl_binary.c:126: error: implicit declaration of function 
> > 'lock_kernel'
> > kernel/sysctl_binary.c:129: error: implicit declaration of function 
> > 'unlock_kernel'
> 
> Bah.  A missing smp_lock.h.

BTW, there is a patch in the kill-the-BKL tree to push down the BKL
further into the sysctl handlers. It may be a good idea to put that
into your tree, or to redo the same thing there differently, since
you already have a patch series touching this area.

	Arnd <><
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/