On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 11:22, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 10:32:28 +0100 Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Stephen, sorry for the inconvenience, both Hans and myself build-tested
>> the new code on an architecture where <linux/delay.h> gets included
>> implicitly, so we didn't notice it was missing.
>
> It happens. ÂIt seems that delay.h is almost always the one that is
> forgotten. ÂX86 builds include it implicitly but powerpc doesn't.
>
> I wonder if we could concoct a nice checkpatch test for it.
Or remove the implicit includes on x86...
$ git grep delay\\.h arch/x86/include/
arch/x86/include/asm/apic.h:#include <linux/delay.h>
arch/x86/include/asm/dma.h:#include <linux/delay.h>
arch/x86/include/asm/i8259.h:#include <linux/delay.h>
$
At first sight, apic.h and dmah.h don't seem to need it.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
            Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
             Â Â -- Linus Torvalds
--
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
