Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for November 17

From: Randy Dunlap <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 15:24:51 -0800

On 11/17/10 15:14, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 09:59:20 -0800 Randy Dunlap <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>
>> Why was #include <linux/smp_lock.h> removed from <linux/hardirq.h> ?
>>
>> I added #include <linux/smp_lock.h> to i387.h, but them mm/filemap.c build fails
>> with the same error:
>>
>> linux-next-20101117/mm/filemap.c: In function 'iov_iter_copy_from_user_atomic':
>> linux-next-20101117/mm/filemap.c:1936: error: implicit declaration of function 'kernel_locked'
> 
> Was this fixed before Linus took that patch?  Also, the #include of

This build error was in linux-next of NOV. 17.  What mainline base did it use?
I don't exactly know how to answer your question...

> linux/smp_lock.h in linux/hardirq.h was the only line between #ifdef
> CONFIG_PREEMPT and #endif ... was this patch even reviewed?
> 
> Maybe (after it was reviewed) it should have been given more time in
> linux-next before being merged.

-- 
~Randy
*** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***