On 5/22/2017 2:03 PM, David Miller wrote:
From: Babu Moger <babu.moger@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2017 18:16:55 -0600
Some architectures use the following guard in include file
"asm/spinlock_types.h" to discourage including the file directly.
Saw these compile errors on SPARC when queued rwlock feature is enabled.
CC kernel/locking/qrwlock.o
In file included from ./include/asm-generic/qrwlock_types.h:5,
from ./arch/sparc/include/asm/qrwlock.h:4,
from kernel/locking/qrwlock.c:24:
./arch/sparc/include/asm/spinlock_types.h:5:3: error:
#error "please don't include this file directly"
Re-arrange the includes in qrwlock_types.h and include spinlock.h
in qrwlock.c to fix it.
Also will be removing this stanza from SPARC. Stay tuned.
Signed-off-by: Babu Moger <babu.moger@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Håkon Bugge <haakon.bugge@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Jane Chu <jane.chu@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Vijay Kumar <vijay.ac.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
In my feedback I said to remove that check from
sparc's asm/spinlock_types.h header.
Which you do in patch #2
But that means this patch #1 here is no longer necessary, since we
conform to the hearder scheme used by other architectures using queued
locks.
So please remove this patch from the series.
Sorry. I did not make it clear. Patch #2 addresses this following problem.
./arch/sparc/include/asm/spinlock_types.h:5:3: error:
#error "please don't include this file directly"
But we still have this following problem. So we needed part of the patch #1.
CC kernel/locking/qrwlock.o
kernel/locking/qrwlock.c: In function ‘queued_read_lock_slowpath’:
kernel/locking/qrwlock.c:89: error: implicit declaration of function
‘arch_spin_lock’
kernel/locking/qrwlock.c:102: error: implicit declaration of function
‘arch_spin_unlock’
make[4]: *** [kernel/locking/qrwlock.o] Error 1
To address this we need following change.
============================================
diff --git a/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c b/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c
index cc3ed0c..2655f26 100644
--- a/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c
+++ b/kernel/locking/qrwlock.c
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
#include <linux/cpumask.h>
#include <linux/percpu.h>
#include <linux/hardirq.h>
+#include <linux/spinlock.h>
#include <asm/qrwlock.h>
/*
I will update the patch set with the above information. Does that work?
Thank you.
