[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B6B8BD5.8020404@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:09:09 +0800
From: Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Miles Lane <miles.lane@...il.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [Patch 0/2] sysfs: fix s_active lockdep warning
Alan Stern wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Feb 2010, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 2010-02-04 at 11:35 -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
>>> +#include <linux/sched.h>
>> #include <linux/lockdep.h>
>>
>> should be sufficient I think.
>
> No, it's not. It leaves MAX_LOCK_DEPTH undeclared. Beats me why that
> symbol ended up in sched.h...
>
because task_struct->held_locks uses it, but it seems better to move
it into lockdep.h...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists