* Re: [PATCH] sh/next: Fix build fail by asm/system.h in asm/bitops.h
2012-03-06 5:07 [PATCH] sh/next: Fix build fail by asm/system.h in asm/bitops.h Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
@ 2012-03-07 6:36 ` Paul Mundt
2012-03-09 3:16 ` Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Mundt @ 2012-03-07 6:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 02:07:09PM +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> Other files are not done include definitely by asm/system.h made
> include in asm/bitops.h.
> This patch remove asm/system.h from asm/bitops.h.
>
Which defconfig were you using that hit this? asm/system.h is usually
included for a reason, although I can't remember off the top of my head
what's used out of it and on what CPU configuration, but I would be
rather hesitant to yank it out on an N of 1 build test.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] sh/next: Fix build fail by asm/system.h in asm/bitops.h
2012-03-06 5:07 [PATCH] sh/next: Fix build fail by asm/system.h in asm/bitops.h Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
2012-03-07 6:36 ` Paul Mundt
@ 2012-03-09 3:16 ` Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
2012-03-23 8:05 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu @ 2012-03-09 3:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
Paul Mundt さんは書きました:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 02:07:09PM +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
>> Other files are not done include definitely by asm/system.h made
>> include in asm/bitops.h.
>> This patch remove asm/system.h from asm/bitops.h.
>>
> Which defconfig were you using that hit this? asm/system.h is usually
> included for a reason, although I can't remember off the top of my head
> what's used out of it and on what CPU configuration, but I would be
> rather hesitant to yank it out on an N of 1 build test.
>
Sorry, I checked sh7785lcr and ap325rxa and other.
We can confirm this problem in linux-next.
Nobuhiro
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] sh/next: Fix build fail by asm/system.h in asm/bitops.h
2012-03-06 5:07 [PATCH] sh/next: Fix build fail by asm/system.h in asm/bitops.h Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
2012-03-07 6:36 ` Paul Mundt
2012-03-09 3:16 ` Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
@ 2012-03-23 8:05 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2012-03-28 4:41 ` Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
2012-03-28 4:42 ` Paul Mundt
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Guennadi Liakhovetski @ 2012-03-23 8:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
On Fri, 9 Mar 2012, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> Paul Mundt さんは書きました:
> > On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 02:07:09PM +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> > > Other files are not done include definitely by asm/system.h made
> > > include in asm/bitops.h.
> > > This patch remove asm/system.h from asm/bitops.h.
> > >
> > Which defconfig were you using that hit this? asm/system.h is usually
> > included for a reason, although I can't remember off the top of my head
> > what's used out of it and on what CPU configuration, but I would be
> > rather hesitant to yank it out on an N of 1 build test.
> >
>
> Sorry, I checked sh7785lcr and ap325rxa and other.
> We can confirm this problem in linux-next.
This breakage is now in the mainline too, please, fix. Paul, if you're
concerned about removing asm/system.h, the below diff preserves it in
asm/bitops.h, but is much uglier, so, I hope the original patch gets
applied.
Thanks
Guennadi
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
diff --git a/arch/sh/include/asm/bitops.h b/arch/sh/include/asm/bitops.h
index 90fa3e4..53323fc 100644
--- a/arch/sh/include/asm/bitops.h
+++ b/arch/sh/include/asm/bitops.h
@@ -7,7 +7,6 @@
#error only <linux/bitops.h> can be included directly
#endif
-#include <asm/system.h>
/* For __swab32 */
#include <asm/byteorder.h>
@@ -100,6 +99,8 @@ static inline unsigned long ffz(unsigned long word)
#include <asm-generic/bitops/__fls.h>
#include <asm-generic/bitops/fls64.h>
+static unsigned fls_long(unsigned long l);
+#include <asm/system.h>
#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
#endif /* __ASM_SH_BITOPS_H */
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] sh/next: Fix build fail by asm/system.h in asm/bitops.h
2012-03-06 5:07 [PATCH] sh/next: Fix build fail by asm/system.h in asm/bitops.h Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2012-03-23 8:05 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
@ 2012-03-28 4:41 ` Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
2012-03-28 4:42 ` Paul Mundt
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu @ 2012-03-28 4:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
Guennadi Liakhovetski さんは書きました:
> On Fri, 9 Mar 2012, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
>
>> Paul Mundt さんは書きました:
>>> On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 02:07:09PM +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
>>>> Other files are not done include definitely by asm/system.h made
>>>> include in asm/bitops.h.
>>>> This patch remove asm/system.h from asm/bitops.h.
>>>>
>>> Which defconfig were you using that hit this? asm/system.h is usually
>>> included for a reason, although I can't remember off the top of my head
>>> what's used out of it and on what CPU configuration, but I would be
>>> rather hesitant to yank it out on an N of 1 build test.
>>>
>> Sorry, I checked sh7785lcr and ap325rxa and other.
>> We can confirm this problem in linux-next.
>
> This breakage is now in the mainline too, please, fix. Paul, if you're
> concerned about removing asm/system.h, the below diff preserves it in
> asm/bitops.h, but is much uglier, so, I hope the original patch gets
> applied.
>
> Thanks
> Guennadi
> ---
> Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
> Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
> http://www.open-technology.de/
>
> diff --git a/arch/sh/include/asm/bitops.h b/arch/sh/include/asm/bitops.h
> index 90fa3e4..53323fc 100644
> --- a/arch/sh/include/asm/bitops.h
> +++ b/arch/sh/include/asm/bitops.h
> @@ -7,7 +7,6 @@
> #error only <linux/bitops.h> can be included directly
> #endif
>
> -#include <asm/system.h>
> /* For __swab32 */
> #include <asm/byteorder.h>
>
> @@ -100,6 +99,8 @@ static inline unsigned long ffz(unsigned long word)
> #include <asm-generic/bitops/__fls.h>
> #include <asm-generic/bitops/fls64.h>
>
> +static unsigned fls_long(unsigned long l);
> +#include <asm/system.h>
> #endif /* __KERNEL__ */
>
> #endif /* __ASM_SH_BITOPS_H */
>
Tested-by: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <nobuhiro.iwamatsu.yj@renesas.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] sh/next: Fix build fail by asm/system.h in asm/bitops.h
2012-03-06 5:07 [PATCH] sh/next: Fix build fail by asm/system.h in asm/bitops.h Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2012-03-28 4:41 ` Nobuhiro Iwamatsu
@ 2012-03-28 4:42 ` Paul Mundt
4 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Paul Mundt @ 2012-03-28 4:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 01:41:43PM +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> Guennadi Liakhovetski ????????????????????????:
> >On Fri, 9 Mar 2012, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> >
> >>Paul Mundt ????????????????????????:
> >>>On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 02:07:09PM +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> >>>>Other files are not done include definitely by asm/system.h made
> >>>>include in asm/bitops.h.
> >>>>This patch remove asm/system.h from asm/bitops.h.
> >>>>
> >>>Which defconfig were you using that hit this? asm/system.h is usually
> >>>included for a reason, although I can't remember off the top of my head
> >>>what's used out of it and on what CPU configuration, but I would be
> >>>rather hesitant to yank it out on an N of 1 build test.
> >>>
> >>Sorry, I checked sh7785lcr and ap325rxa and other.
> >>We can confirm this problem in linux-next.
> >
> >This breakage is now in the mainline too, please, fix. Paul, if you're
> >concerned about removing asm/system.h, the below diff preserves it in
> >asm/bitops.h, but is much uglier, so, I hope the original patch gets
> >applied.
>
> Tested-by: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <nobuhiro.iwamatsu.yj@renesas.com>
Ok, it seems to hold up for random builds and all of the configurations I
tested, so perhaps whatever reason we needed the header there for in the
first place went away some time ago and I never noticed.
I've applied the original now, thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread