Re: [PATCH 09/11] drivers/scsi: include module.h for modular ufshcd-pltfrm code
On 15-04-30 10:35 PM, James Bottomley wrote: On Thu, 2015-04-30 at 21:47 -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: This file is built off of a tristate Kconfig option and also contains modular function calls so it should explicitly include module.h to avoid compile breakage during header shuffles done in the future. I don't understand your logic. The ufs code made a design choice to consolidate most headers for the hcd code in a local include (ufshcd.h), which includes module.h, so why would they explicitly need it here as well? And if we follow your logic, why wouldn't they also need to duplicate everything else (like the scsi includes)? In my original build testing this file failed to compile once the modular code was moved from init.h to module.h as per the description in the 0/11. Perhaps since that testing something else has changed. I will drop this patch and retest and if it no longer fails, then great. Paul. -- James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 09/11] drivers/scsi: include module.h for modular ufshcd-pltfrm code
On Fri, 2015-05-01 at 09:37 -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: On 15-04-30 10:35 PM, James Bottomley wrote: On Thu, 2015-04-30 at 21:47 -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: This file is built off of a tristate Kconfig option and also contains modular function calls so it should explicitly include module.h to avoid compile breakage during header shuffles done in the future. I don't understand your logic. The ufs code made a design choice to consolidate most headers for the hcd code in a local include (ufshcd.h), which includes module.h, so why would they explicitly need it here as well? And if we follow your logic, why wouldn't they also need to duplicate everything else (like the scsi includes)? In my original build testing this file failed to compile once the modular code was moved from init.h to module.h as per the description in the 0/11. Just as a point of principle, you didn't send the 0/11 patch, so I only have this one to go by. Perhaps since that testing something else has changed. I will drop this patch and retest and if it no longer fails, then great. Sounds good. James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[PATCH 09/11] drivers/scsi: include module.h for modular ufshcd-pltfrm code
This file is built off of a tristate Kconfig option and also contains modular function calls so it should explicitly include module.h to avoid compile breakage during header shuffles done in the future. Cc: Vinayak Holikatti vinholika...@gmail.com Cc: James E.J. Bottomley jbottom...@parallels.com Cc: linux-s...@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker paul.gortma...@windriver.com --- drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.c index 7db9564f507d..1c0bac8a7e4a 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd-pltfrm.c @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ * this program. */ +#include linux/module.h #include linux/platform_device.h #include linux/pm_runtime.h #include linux/of.h -- 2.2.1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 09/11] drivers/scsi: include module.h for modular ufshcd-pltfrm code
On Thu, 2015-04-30 at 21:47 -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote: This file is built off of a tristate Kconfig option and also contains modular function calls so it should explicitly include module.h to avoid compile breakage during header shuffles done in the future. I don't understand your logic. The ufs code made a design choice to consolidate most headers for the hcd code in a local include (ufshcd.h), which includes module.h, so why would they explicitly need it here as well? And if we follow your logic, why wouldn't they also need to duplicate everything else (like the scsi includes)? James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
