Currently sched.h and wait.h have circular dependency between both.
wait.h defines macros wake_up*() which use macros TASK_* defined by
sched.h. But as sched.h indirectly includes wait.h, such wait.h header
file can't include sched.h too. The side effect is when some file
includes wait.h and tries
On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 16:38 +0200, David Cohen wrote:
> Currently sched.h and wait.h have circular dependency between both.
> wait.h defines macros wake_up*() which use macros TASK_* defined by
> sched.h. But as sched.h indirectly includes wait.h, such wait.h header
> file can't include sched.h too
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 16:38 +0200, David Cohen wrote:
>> Currently sched.h and wait.h have circular dependency between both.
>> wait.h defines macros wake_up*() which use macros TASK_* defined by
>> sched.h. But as sched.h indirectly include
On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 18:03 +0200, David Cohen wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 16:38 +0200, David Cohen wrote:
> >> Currently sched.h and wait.h have circular dependency between both.
> >> wait.h defines macros wake_up*() which use macros T
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 05:20:45PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > I think Alexey already told you what you done wrong.
> > >
> > > Also, I really don't like the task_state.h header, it assumes a lot of
> > > things it doesn't include itself and only works because its using macros
> > > and
On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 18:29 +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 05:20:45PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > I think Alexey already told you what you done wrong.
> > > >
> > > > Also, I really don't like the task_state.h header, it assumes a lot of
> > > > things it doe
Hi,
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 05:43:27PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > And then make sched.c include signal.h and completion.h.
> >
> > you wouldn't prevent the underlying problem which is the need to include
> > sched.h whenever you include wait.h and use wake_up*()
>
> If you'd applied your
On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 18:54 +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> What you seem to have missed is that sched.h doesn't include wait.h, it
> includes completion.h and completion.h needs wait.h due the
> wait_queue_head_t it uses.
Yeah, so? sched.h doesn't need completion.h, but like with wait.h I'd
argue t
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 06:06:02PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-02-21 at 18:54 +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>
> > What you seem to have missed is that sched.h doesn't include wait.h, it
> > includes completion.h and completion.h needs wait.h due the
> > wait_queue_head_t it uses.
>
>
On 02/21, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>
> On 02/21, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > afaict its needed because struct signal_struct and struct sighand_struct
> > include a wait_queue_head_t. The inclusion seems to come through
> > completion.h, but afaict we don't actually need to include completion.h
> > be
On 02/21, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> afaict its needed because struct signal_struct and struct sighand_struct
> include a wait_queue_head_t. The inclusion seems to come through
> completion.h, but afaict we don't actually need to include completion.h
> because all we have is a pointer to a completio
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 06:06:02PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 1) remove the inclusion of completion.h -- easy we can live with an
> incomplete type.
ACK
> 2) move the other wait_queue_head_t users (signal_struct sighand_struct)
> out of sched.h
>
> 3) ...
Compile test! :^)
> 4) profit!
>
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 7:27 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/21, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>>
>> On 02/21, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> >
>> > afaict its needed because struct signal_struct and struct sighand_struct
>> > include a wait_queue_head_t. The inclusion seems to come through
>> > completion.h, b
13 matches
Mail list logo
