Hi Sakari and Felipe, On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Felipe Balbi wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 12:50:12PM +0100, Thomas Weber wrote: >>> Hello Felipe, >>> >>> in include/linux/wait.h >>> >>> #define wake_up(x) Â Â Â Â Â Â__wake_up(x, TASK_NORMAL, 1, NULL) >> >> aha, now I get it, so shouldn't the real fix be including <linux/sched.h> >> on <linux/wait.h>, I mean, it's <linuux/wait.h> who uses a symbol >> defined in <linux/sched.h>, right ? That's a tricky situation. linux/sched.h includes indirectly linux/completion.h which includes linux/wait.h. By including sched.h in wait.h, the side effect is completion.h will then include a blank wait.h file and trigger a compilation error every time wait.h is included by any file. > > Surprisingly many other files still don't seem to be affected. But this > is actually a better solution (to include sched.h in wait.h). It does not affect all files include wait.h because TASK_* macros are used with #define statements only. So it has no effect unless some file tries to use a macro which used TASK_*. It seems the usual on kernel is to include both wait.h and sched.h when necessary. IMO your patch is fine. Br, David > > -- > Sakari Ailus > sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at Âhttp://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at Âhttp://www.tux.org/lkml/ > -- 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
