On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 04:05:17PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 08:46:54AM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 01:55:25PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > commit 656acd2bbc4ce7f224de499ee255698701396c48 > > > Author: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Date: Thu Jun 26 11:30:02 2008 -0400 > > > > > > Input: fix locking in force-feedback core > > > > > > The newly added event_lock spinlock in the input core disallows sleeping > > > and therefore using mutexes in event handlers. Convert force-feedback > > > core to rely on event_lock instead of mutex to protect slots allocated > > > for fore-feedback effects. The original mutex is still used to serialize > > > uploading and erasing of effects. > > > > > > causes the following regression on m68k: > > > > > > | linux/drivers/input/ff-core.c: In function 'input_ff_upload': > > > | linux/drivers/input/ff-core.c:172: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type > > > | linux/drivers/input/ff-core.c: In function 'erase_effect': > > > | linux/drivers/input/ff-core.c:197: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type > > > | linux/drivers/input/ff-core.c:204: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type > > > | make[4]: *** [drivers/input/ff-core.o] Error 1 > > > > > > > Argh! Sorry about it. > > > > > As the incomplete type is `struct task_struct', including <linux/sched.h> fixes > > > it. > > > > Not linux/spinlock.h? I wonder if I need to include linux/spinlock.h and > > linux/mutex.h directly from linux/input.h... What is the current > > policy on headers - do they need to include everything to be > > functional or it is responsibility of the user? > > Theoretically it's the responsibility of the header to include > everything it needs. > > In practice we are after -rc8 and even thinking of this kind of #include > changes under include/linux/ makes me nervous - like the fact that the > ff-core.c problem occured _only_ on m68k our headers are too fragile for > expecting such changes to simply work. > > Can we go with Geert's patch for 2.6.26 and if you want to fix it > properly you can send a patch for 2.6.27? > No, no, I am totally fine with Geert's fix, I am talking about later of course. -- Dmitry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
