From: Steve deRosier <steve@cozybit•com>
To: "John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver•com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb•auug.org.au>,
linux-next@vger•kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: build warning after merge of the wireless tree
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2010 10:07:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <i2p446ae9281004271007h43f9949dw9848a7786a9c7be1@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100427154043.GA25860@tuxdriver.com>
On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 8:40 AM, John W. Linville
<linville@tuxdriver•com> wrote:
>
> Right. So in wireless-testing I did the includes in the other order
> (i.e. "deb_defs.h" first), but that is a bit ugly. Any suggestions
> on alternatives?
>
> "#undef pr_fmt" just before the "#define pr_fmt(fmt)..." line in
> db_defs.h seems to eliminate the warning even with the more normal
> ordering of the #include lines. I'm not familiar with the usage of
> pr_fmt -- will doing the above preserve the desired effect?
John,
I thought about that particular strategy (doing the #undef) instead of
the non-traditional include mess. But not being familiar enough with
the pr_fmt stuff, I didn't want to do it.
My goal was to get the '#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt'
line in the deb_defs.h header so it was only in one place. But to
build, that define must be before kernel.h gets included anywhere.
Hence the current mess.
I'm OK with the #undef strategy and moving the deb_defs.h include to a
better position if that's the correct way to do this. Please let me
know if I have any action items on this.
- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-27 17:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-27 1:28 linux-next: build warning after merge of the wireless tree Stephen Rothwell
2010-04-27 15:40 ` John W. Linville
2010-04-27 17:07 ` Steve deRosier [this message]
2010-04-28 6:17 ` Stephen Rothwell
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-11-17 0:35 Stephen Rothwell
2010-12-07 3:11 Stephen Rothwell
2023-09-12 5:13 Stephen Rothwell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=i2p446ae9281004271007h43f9949dw9848a7786a9c7be1@mail.gmail.com \
--to=steve@cozybit$(echo .)com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver$(echo .)com \
--cc=sfr@canb$(echo .)auug.org.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox