| Message ID | 1448525104-20101-1-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 2c81de771f38e54324ede3f24118f4852570b384 |
| Headers | show |
On 26 November 2015 at 09:05, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote: > So far struct spi_nor was using just a pointer to struct mtd_info so it > wasn't needed to have it fully defined there. After recent change we > embed whole struct so we need to include a proper header. > > Fixes: 1976367173a4 ("mtd: spi-nor: embed struct mtd_info within struct spi_nor") > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> This may be worth taking as a fix for 4.4. However I'm not aware of any upstream driver failing to build because of this.
On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 10:25:55AM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > On 26 November 2015 at 09:05, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote: > > So far struct spi_nor was using just a pointer to struct mtd_info so it > > wasn't needed to have it fully defined there. After recent change we > > embed whole struct so we need to include a proper header. Good catch. > > Fixes: 1976367173a4 ("mtd: spi-nor: embed struct mtd_info within struct spi_nor") I'm not 100% sure, but I thought I recall the -stable folks picking up for-linus commits just based on the 'Fixes:' tags. I feel like that isn't always ideal, though. > > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> > > This may be worth taking as a fix for 4.4. However I'm not aware of > any upstream driver failing to build because of this. I don't see why it would need rushed out. All users of spi-nor.h currently include mtd.h first. So there are no build failures because of it. Regards, Brian
On 27 November 2015 at 23:33, Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 10:25:55AM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >> On 26 November 2015 at 09:05, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Fixes: 1976367173a4 ("mtd: spi-nor: embed struct mtd_info within struct spi_nor") > > I'm not 100% sure, but I thought I recall the -stable folks picking up > for-linus commits just based on the 'Fixes:' tags. I feel like that > isn't always ideal, though. I'm confused. Do you mean I shouldn't include it? Do you have a reference to more detailed Fixes usage? All I found is info in Documentation/SubmittingPatches: > If your patch fixes a bug in a specific commit, e.g. you found an issue using > git-bisect, please use the 'Fixes:' tag I think 'Fixes' usage is OK in this case. >> > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> >> >> This may be worth taking as a fix for 4.4. However I'm not aware of >> any upstream driver failing to build because of this. > > I don't see why it would need rushed out. All users of spi-nor.h > currently include mtd.h first. So there are no build failures because of > it. OK. It was just an OpenWrt out-of-tree driver that failed to compile.
On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 03:05:26PM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > On 27 November 2015 at 23:33, Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 10:25:55AM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > >> On 26 November 2015 at 09:05, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Fixes: 1976367173a4 ("mtd: spi-nor: embed struct mtd_info within struct spi_nor") > > > > I'm not 100% sure, but I thought I recall the -stable folks picking up > > for-linus commits just based on the 'Fixes:' tags. I feel like that > > isn't always ideal, though. > > I'm confused. Do you mean I shouldn't include it? No, the 'Fixes' usage is fine. I'm just not clear what importance is placed on it by others. > Do you have a reference to more detailed Fixes usage? All I found is > info in Documentation/SubmittingPatches: > > If your patch fixes a bug in a specific commit, e.g. you found an issue using > > git-bisect, please use the 'Fixes:' tag > I think 'Fixes' usage is OK in this case. I don't have any better reference. Perhaps I'm completely mistaken, and 'Fixes' is never taken as the sole source of for-stable annotation. Brian
On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 09:05:04AM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > So far struct spi_nor was using just a pointer to struct mtd_info so it > wasn't needed to have it fully defined there. After recent change we > embed whole struct so we need to include a proper header. > > Fixes: 1976367173a4 ("mtd: spi-nor: embed struct mtd_info within struct spi_nor") > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> Applied to l2-mtd.git
diff --git a/include/linux/mtd/spi-nor.h b/include/linux/mtd/spi-nor.h index 7bed974..fac3f6f 100644 --- a/include/linux/mtd/spi-nor.h +++ b/include/linux/mtd/spi-nor.h @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ #include <linux/bitops.h> #include <linux/mtd/cfi.h> +#include <linux/mtd/mtd.h> /* * Manufacturer IDs @@ -117,8 +118,6 @@ enum spi_nor_option_flags { SNOR_F_USE_FSR = BIT(0), }; -struct mtd_info; - /** * struct spi_nor - Structure for defining a the SPI NOR layer * @mtd: point to a mtd_info structure
So far struct spi_nor was using just a pointer to struct mtd_info so it wasn't needed to have it fully defined there. After recent change we embed whole struct so we need to include a proper header. Fixes: 1976367173a4 ("mtd: spi-nor: embed struct mtd_info within struct spi_nor") Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> --- include/linux/mtd/spi-nor.h | 3 +-- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)