On 11/17/10 15:14, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 09:59:20 -0800 Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Why was #include <linux/smp_lock.h> removed from <linux/hardirq.h> ? >> >> I added #include <linux/smp_lock.h> to i387.h, but them mm/filemap.c build fails >> with the same error: >> >> linux-next-20101117/mm/filemap.c: In function 'iov_iter_copy_from_user_atomic': >> linux-next-20101117/mm/filemap.c:1936: error: implicit declaration of function 'kernel_locked' > > Was this fixed before Linus took that patch? Also, the #include of This build error was in linux-next of NOV. 17. What mainline base did it use? I don't exactly know how to answer your question... > linux/smp_lock.h in linux/hardirq.h was the only line between #ifdef > CONFIG_PREEMPT and #endif ... was this patch even reviewed? > > Maybe (after it was reviewed) it should have been given more time in > linux-next before being merged. -- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
