* Linus Torvalds <torva...@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> Anyway, I fixed the semantic merge error by just including thar
> <linux/sched/signal.h> file, but this is just not acceptable.
>
> Having to have files know that if they use the wait-event functins
> (well, _some_ of them), they not only need to include <linux/wait.h>,
> they need to completely illogically also include
> <linux/sched/signal.h> is just not maintainable.
Absolutely and agreed, will fix this ASAP!
wait.h generates too large functions anyway, so uninlining parts of it will be
an
improvement anyway.
> And who knows what similar semantic cases I _won't_ notice, because
> they occur in code I don't build even with my allmodconfig builds?
I did a fair amount of allyes/allno/allmod plus randconfig testing on x86, and
caught and fixed a number of cases, so that angle should be covered to a fair
degree.
On non-x86 I did allyes/allno/allmod testing as well, but not randconfig
testing -
plus some of the architectures have a large amount of defconfigs which I
couldn't
all test through.
So I'd expect build breakages to be concentrated into newly upstreamed code
(such
as this one) - which risk I tried to reduce by re-testing them on the
almost-last
day of the merge window.
Thanks,
Ingo
