[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F21C9EC.60009@parallels.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2012 01:47:24 +0400
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@...allels.com>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
<rdunlap@...otime.net>, <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <gleb@...hat.com>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Jan 25 (net/sock.h, jump_label, memcg)
On 01/27/2012 01:46 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 00:31:13 +0400 Glauber Costa<glommer@...allels.com> wrote:
>>
>> On the specifics of this bug, I verified this config compiles okay in
>> your tree + my patches at the day I last sent them. I also verified it
>> breaks on the tree today.
>>
>> The reason seems to be that some other patch tweaked with the header
>> files in an unrelated patch, and the static_branch definition that was
>> getting to us in sock.h, is no longer getting there.
>>
>> Including it explicitly fixes it here. I will again pass through a
>> battery of randconfigs on my own, and send you a fix.
>
> Which is one of the reasons we have Rule 1 in Documentation/SubmitChecklist:
>
> 1: If you use a facility then #include the file that defines/declares
> that facility. Don't depend on other header files pulling in ones
> that you use.
>
I understand that. I wasn't saying I am not to blame, just why this
wasn't catched in any test of mine before.
The fix is on its way.
--
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