[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.03.1304301114140.17372@syhkavp.arg>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 11:15:25 -0400 (EDT)
From: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Jon Medhurst <tixy@...aro.org>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...el.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next build error (at91) - use of bool in mach/arch.h
On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com> wrote:
> > > So, I am wondering if the best correction is to add the types.h header file
> > > in the asm/mach/arch.h file, like this:
> > >
> > > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/mach/arch.h
> > > @@ -8,6 +8,8 @@
> > > * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> > > */
> > >
> > > +#include <linux/types.h>
> > > +
> > > #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
> > >
> > > struct tag;
> > >
> > > or if a better option would be to re-arrange the include directives in
> > > various at91xxx_devices.c files?
> >
> > Include files should be self-contained, so asm/mach/arch.h is the right place.
>
> Nicolas,
> are you happy to come up with a proper patch to fix the issue?
I'd prefer if you just folded the above include into the original patch,
unless this has been pulled already.
Nicolas
--
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