On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 03:14:05PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > On Fri 2020-06-12 14:36:35, Herbert Xu wrote: > > As it stands if you include printk.h by itself it will fail to > > compile because it requires definitions from ratelimit.h. However, > > simply including ratelimit.h from printk.h does not work due to > > inclusion loops involving sched.h and kernel.h. > > > > This patch solves this by moving bits from ratelimit.h into a new > > header file which can then be included by printk.h without any > > worries about header loops. > > > > The build bot then revealed some intriguing failures arising out > > of this patch. On s390 there is an inclusion loop with asm/bug.h > > and linux/kernel.h that triggers a compile failure, because kernel.h > > will cause asm-generic/bug.h to be included before s390's own > > asm/bug.h has finished processing. This has been fixed by not > > including kernel.h in arch/s390/include/asm/bug.h. > > > > A related failure was seen on powerpc where asm/bug.h leads to > > the inclusion of linux/kernel.h via asm-generic/bug.h which then > > prematurely tries to use the very macros defined in asm/bug.h. > > The particular inclusion path which led to this involves lockdep.h. > > I have fixed this moving the type definitions lockdep.h into the > > new lockdep_types.h. > > > > Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > I am fine with the changes as long as the kernel test robot > does not complain ;-) > > Acked-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx> > > Well, I wonder if PeterZ is fine with the lockdep part. It might make > sense to split it into separate patch as a prerequisite. They look fine, but yes, I think it makes sense to split that out.
