From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757091Ab1I3DWj (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Sep 2011 23:22:39 -0400 Received: from mail.windriver.com ([147.11.1.11]:43309 "EHLO mail.windriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753919Ab1I3DWh (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Sep 2011 23:22:37 -0400 Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2011 23:22:32 -0400 From: Paul Gortmaker To: Stephen Rothwell CC: , Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree Message-ID: <20110930032231.GB16194@windriver.com> References: <20110930111241.829ed0ada733516b71ab120d@canb.auug.org.au> <20110930130550.2f6597491fa1b59f3be839e0@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20110930130550.2f6597491fa1b59f3be839e0@canb.auug.org.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org [Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the final tree] On 30/09/2011 (Fri 13:05) Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Paul, > > On Thu, 29 Sep 2011 22:40:59 -0400 Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > > > On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 9:12 PM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > > > After merging the final tree, today's linux-next build (avr32 allnoconfig) > > > failed like this: > > > > > > arch/avr32/mach-at32ap/pio.c: In function 'pio_probe': > > > arch/avr32/mach-at32ap/pio.c:401: error: 'THIS_MODULE' undeclared (first use in this function) > > > > > > Probably revealed by the module.h split up.  I guess it needs export.h > > > included. > > > > Since export.h does not exist for most people, I'm OK adding it > > in instances like this as a post-merge patch. > > I had another look at this and it turns out that export.h is already > included, but only conditionally. I guess the include just needs moving > to the top of the file. Agreed. A side effect of my "find a linux include and add another below it" script. These conditional includes (which are dubious to begin with) seem to always get caught by that. I'll fix this up and make it unconditional for tomorrow. Thanks, Paul. > > -- > Cheers, > Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au > http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/