[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140318183510.GA430@swordfish>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 21:35:10 +0300
From: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Nitin Gupta <ngupta@...are.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] zram: include linux/err.h
Hello Arnd,
On (03/15/14 21:26), Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Saturday 15 March 2014, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> > On (03/15/14 10:40), Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > The zram driver uses the ERR_PTR macro defined in <linux/err.h>
> > > and relies on this header to be included implicitly through
> > > other headers, which is not (always) the case on the ARM architecture.
> > >
> >
> > returned from zcomp ERR_PTR is checked and used in zram_drv.c, should
> > in this case there also be inclusion of err.h in zram_drv.h? if so, it
> > probably makes sense to move inclusion of err.h to zcomp.h, which is
> > included both in zcomp.c and zram_drv.c
> >
>
> The normal convention is to only include headers from other headers if
> that is required by the contents of the header itself.
>
> Following the common conventions, it's better to include linux/err.h
> in both zram_drv.c and zcomp.c, but not in zram_drv.h.
thanks.
may I ask you to resend the patch with linux/err.h included
in both zram_drv.c and zcomp.c?
-ss
> I didn't do that in my patch, because I only got a build error in
> one of the two files.
>
> Arnd
>
--
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