On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, Jean Delvare wrote: > On Tue, 3 Mar 2009 01:40:00 -0800 (PST), Trent Piepho wrote: > > On Mon, 2 Mar 2009, Jean Delvare wrote: > > In 2.6.20 delayed_work was split from work_struct. The concept of delayed > > work was already there and schedule_delayed_work() hasn't changed. I think > > this can also be handled with a compat.h change that defines delayed_work > > to work_struct. That will only be a problem on pre 2.6.20 kernels if some > > code decides to define identifiers named work_struct and delayed_work in > > the same scope. There are currently no identifier named delayed_work in > > any driver and one driver (sq905) has a structure member named > > work_struct. So I think it'll be ok. > > Wow, I didn't expect that many different compatibility issues. This > goes beyond the time I am ready to spend on it, I'm afraid. I already have a patch for compat.h that handles the last remaining issue. You don't have to do anything. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
