Re: [build failure] Re: BKL: remove extraneous #include <smp_lock.h>

[Ingo Molnar]

* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/