Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754547AbYJ2OUf (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Oct 2008 10:20:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753372AbYJ2OU0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Oct 2008 10:20:26 -0400 Received: from smtp4.pp.htv.fi ([213.243.153.38]:37578 "EHLO smtp4.pp.htv.fi" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753366AbYJ2OUZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Oct 2008 10:20:25 -0400 Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 16:19:09 +0200 From: Adrian Bunk To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: =?utf-8?B?UmHDumw=?= Porcel , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, Ivan Kokshaysky , klausman@gentoo.org, Jesse Barnes , Andrew Morton , rth@twiddle.net Subject: Re: [ALPHA] 2.6.28-rc fails to compile Message-ID: <20081029141909.GC9108@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> References: <49083361.5060907@gentoo.org> <20081029100356.GA28224@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> <20081029062741.7400e330@infradead.org> <20081029134553.GA9108@cs181140183.pp.htv.fi> <20081029065935.7a5930f9@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081029065935.7a5930f9@infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1599 Lines: 45 On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 06:59:35AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:45:53 +0200 > Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 06:27:41AM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > > > > Andrew has a patch for this in his tree for a while... I was > > > assuming he'd do a patchdump to Linus late in -rc1 but it seems not > > > to have happened.. > > > > The basic problem for the Alpha build errors are circular #include's > > (that are anyway a pretty bad thing), and I'm currently attacking > > that problem (it seems to be surprisingly easy). > > > > That's IMHO better than the patch in -mm that uninlines > > pci_ioremap_bar(). > > and in my opinion the uninline is nicer ;) > Because that means we can add more checks to it over time without > bloating the kernel. My usage of the word "better" was wrong. For fixing the compile error I do consider the patch I'm currently testing as better, since this could otherwise beat us again in the future. But the patches are completely orthogonal, and there's no reason against including both. cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/