[PATCH] trace: add missing forward declaration

[PATCH] trace: add missing forward declaration

[Ahbong Chang]

Without this forward declaration compile may fail if this header is
included only for registering other probe event without struct
pool_workqueue.

Signed-off-by: Ahbong Chang <cwahbong@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@google.com>
---
 include/trace/events/workqueue.h | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/trace/events/workqueue.h b/include/trace/events/workqueue.h
index 2f057a494d93..9a761bc6a251 100644
--- a/include/trace/events/workqueue.h
+++ b/include/trace/events/workqueue.h
@@ -25,6 +25,8 @@ DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(workqueue_work,
 	TP_printk("work struct %p", __entry->work)
 );
 
+struct pool_workqueue;
+
 /**
  * workqueue_queue_work - called when a work gets queued
  * @req_cpu:	the requested cpu
-- 
2.17.0.484.g0c8726318c-goog

Re: [PATCH] trace: add missing forward declaration

[Steven Rostedt]

On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 10:36:25 +0800
Ahbong Chang <cwahbong@google.com> wrote:

> Without this forward declaration compile may fail if this header is
> included only for registering other probe event without struct
> pool_workqueue.
> 

Is this for new work or is there a config which this fails with today?

-- Steve

> Signed-off-by: Ahbong Chang <cwahbong@google.com>
> Reviewed-by: Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@google.com>
> ---
>  include/trace/events/workqueue.h | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/trace/events/workqueue.h b/include/trace/events/workqueue.h
> index 2f057a494d93..9a761bc6a251 100644
> --- a/include/trace/events/workqueue.h
> +++ b/include/trace/events/workqueue.h
> @@ -25,6 +25,8 @@ DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(workqueue_work,
>  	TP_printk("work struct %p", __entry->work)
>  );
>  
> +struct pool_workqueue;
> +
>  /**
>   * workqueue_queue_work - called when a work gets queued
>   * @req_cpu:	the requested cpu

Re: [PATCH] trace: add missing forward declaration

[Ahbong Chang]

It does not fail with any config without this fix. This is for new work.

-- Ahbong

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 9:24 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 10:36:25 +0800
> Ahbong Chang <cwahbong@google.com> wrote:

> > Without this forward declaration compile may fail if this header is
> > included only for registering other probe event without struct
> > pool_workqueue.
> >

> Is this for new work or is there a config which this fails with today?

> -- Steve

> > Signed-off-by: Ahbong Chang <cwahbong@google.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Todd Poynor <toddpoynor@google.com>
> > ---
> >  include/trace/events/workqueue.h | 2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/trace/events/workqueue.h
b/include/trace/events/workqueue.h
> > index 2f057a494d93..9a761bc6a251 100644
> > --- a/include/trace/events/workqueue.h
> > +++ b/include/trace/events/workqueue.h
> > @@ -25,6 +25,8 @@ DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(workqueue_work,
> >       TP_printk("work struct %p", __entry->work)
> >  );
> >
> > +struct pool_workqueue;
> > +
> >  /**
> >   * workqueue_queue_work - called when a work gets queued
> >   * @req_cpu: the requested cpu

Re: [PATCH] trace: add missing forward declaration

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 02:18:47AM +0000, Ahbong Chang wrote:
> It does not fail with any config without this fix. This is for new work.

Then why not submit it as part of the "new work" patch series?  That's
how dependancies are normally handled.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH] trace: add missing forward declaration

[Ahbong Chang]

The new work series are not ready yet. I think this patch does make the
source better so here is the small patch alone.

-- Ahbong


On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 6:29 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman <
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 02:18:47AM +0000, Ahbong Chang wrote:
> > It does not fail with any config without this fix. This is for new work.

> Then why not submit it as part of the "new work" patch series?  That's
> how dependancies are normally handled.

> thanks,

> greg k-h

Re: [PATCH] trace: add missing forward declaration

[Steven Rostedt]

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 12:29:09 +0200
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 02:18:47AM +0000, Ahbong Chang wrote:
> > It does not fail with any config without this fix. This is for new work.  
> 
> Then why not submit it as part of the "new work" patch series?  That's
> how dependancies are normally handled.

I consider this patch making the kernel more robust. The reason I asked
was to know if it should be marked for stable or not. If nothing
currently relies on it, I just put it into the -rc as a "make the
kernel a little more robust" change. If other code relies on it, I
mark it for stable.

I'll take this patch as more of a clean up.

Thanks!

-- Steve