linux-kernel - Re: sungem: fix compile failure caused by trivial #include consolidation

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1107291620400.7300@pobox.suse.cz>
Date:	Fri, 29 Jul 2011 16:22:29 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com, vitalivanov@...il.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sungem: fix compile failure caused by trivial #include
 consolidation

On Fri, 29 Jul 2011, David Miller wrote:

> >> This patch:
> >> 
> >> commit e44ba033c5654dbfda53461c9b1f7dd9bd1d198f
> >> Author: Vitaliy Ivanov <vitalivanov@...il.com>
> >> Date:   Mon Jun 20 16:08:07 2011 +0200
> >> 
> >>     treewide: remove duplicate includes
> >> 
> >> Causes this compile failure on parisc:
> >> 
> >>   CC [M]  drivers/net/sungem.o
> >> drivers/net/sungem.c:49:22: error: asm/prom.h: No such file or directory
> >> make[2]: *** [drivers/net/sungem.o] Error 1
> >> 
> >> Only Sparc and PPC actually have the asm/prom.h include, so you can't
> >> consolidate it outside of the ifdefs.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: James Bottomley <JBottomley@...allels.com>
> >> 
> >> ---
> >> 
> >> This really shouldn't be happening with a trivial patch, since it's an
> >> obviously non-trivial transformation ... I assume the duplicate include
> >> checker isn't taking #ifdefs into account?
> > 
> > Ah, right. I am afraid this was simply overlooked. David, do you want me 
> > to take this, or will you fix that up in your tree? (I am fine either 
> > way).
> 
> Take what, although James signed off he seemd to simply repost your
> patch again rather than a fix, unless I'm reading it wrong :-)

Well yes, I think that James wanted to actually send a revert of that 
patch (as otherwise he wouldn't Sign-off on it) instead, right James? :)

> But yeah once there is a fix please push it.

So I'll revert that hunk with James' Reported-by, if there are no 
objections.

Thanks,

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
--
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/