A consolidated implementation will provide this generically through
asm/byteorder, remove direct includes to avoid breakage when the
changeover to the new implementation occurs.
Signed-off-by: Harvey Harrison <[email protected]>
---
Andrew, this hunk seems to have been lost when you sent it to Linus, it's possible
you applied this on top of the -next tree where this file has moved, but the tests
tree hasn't been pulled yet.
The rest of the patch went into mainline as 1d8cca44b6a244b7e378546d719041819049a0f9
I believe it was acked-by Paul, but CC'd to be sure.
kernel/rcutorture.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/rcutorture.c b/kernel/rcutorture.c
index 90b5b12..85cb905 100644
--- a/kernel/rcutorture.c
+++ b/kernel/rcutorture.c
@@ -42,10 +42,10 @@
#include <linux/freezer.h>
#include <linux/cpu.h>
#include <linux/delay.h>
-#include <linux/byteorder/swabb.h>
#include <linux/stat.h>
#include <linux/srcu.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
+#include <asm/byteorder.h>
MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
MODULE_AUTHOR("Paul E. McKenney <[email protected]> and "
--
1.6.0.2
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 10:23:38 -0700
Harvey Harrison <[email protected]> wrote:
> A consolidated implementation will provide this generically through
> asm/byteorder, remove direct includes to avoid breakage when the
> changeover to the new implementation occurs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Harvey Harrison <[email protected]>
> ---
> Andrew, this hunk seems to have been lost when you sent it to Linus, it's possible
> you applied this on top of the -next tree where this file has moved, but the tests
> tree hasn't been pulled yet.
>
> The rest of the patch went into mainline as 1d8cca44b6a244b7e378546d719041819049a0f9
>
Grump. It happens sometimes. People putting stuff into linux-next and
then not merging it into the next kernel.
>
> kernel/rcutorture.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/rcutorture.c b/kernel/rcutorture.c
> index 90b5b12..85cb905 100644
> --- a/kernel/rcutorture.c
> +++ b/kernel/rcutorture.c
> @@ -42,10 +42,10 @@
> #include <linux/freezer.h>
> #include <linux/cpu.h>
> #include <linux/delay.h>
> -#include <linux/byteorder/swabb.h>
> #include <linux/stat.h>
> #include <linux/srcu.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> +#include <asm/byteorder.h>
Should this be linux/byteorder.h? (Which weirdly doesn't include
asm/byteorder.h).
On Tue, 2008-10-21 at 13:15 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 10:23:38 -0700
> Harvey Harrison <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > A consolidated implementation will provide this generically through
> > asm/byteorder, remove direct includes to avoid breakage when the
> > changeover to the new implementation occurs.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Harvey Harrison <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > Andrew, this hunk seems to have been lost when you sent it to Linus, it's possible
> > you applied this on top of the -next tree where this file has moved, but the tests
> > tree hasn't been pulled yet.
> >
> > The rest of the patch went into mainline as 1d8cca44b6a244b7e378546d719041819049a0f9
> >
>
> Grump. It happens sometimes. People putting stuff into linux-next and
> then not merging it into the next kernel.
>
> Should this be linux/byteorder.h? (Which weirdly doesn't include
> asm/byteorder.h).
As the implementations all used to live in asm/byteorder.h before
consolidating, it needs to be asm until all arches convert. At that
time we can do the flip and let linux/ be directly includable.
Harvey
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:15:34 -0700 Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Andrew, this hunk seems to have been lost when you sent it to Linus, it's possible
> > you applied this on top of the -next tree where this file has moved, but the tests
> > tree hasn't been pulled yet.
> >
> > The rest of the patch went into mainline as 1d8cca44b6a244b7e378546d719041819049a0f9
> >
>
> Grump. It happens sometimes. People putting stuff into linux-next and
> then not merging it into the next kernel.
The "tests" tree has been requested to be pulled twice (or so) with no
response apparently, so I have now dropped it from the -next tree until
someone decides if we want to integrate it at all.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell [email protected]
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/