Re: [PATCH] proc_devtree: fix THIS_MODULE without module.h

2010-01-12 Thread Alexey Dobriyan
On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 03:58:47PM -0700, Grant Likely wrote: > On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 4:01 AM, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > > I'd say, remove .owner line. > > It definitely not needed in non-modular code. > > No. Jeremy's fix is the better one. Having the .owner line doesn't > cost anything and it

Re: [PATCH] proc_devtree: fix THIS_MODULE without module.h

2010-01-11 Thread Grant Likely
On Sat, Jan 9, 2010 at 4:01 AM, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 01:19:13PM +1100, Jeremy Kerr wrote: >> Commit e22f628395432b967f2f505858c64450f7835365 introduced a build >> breakage for ARM devtree work: the THIS_MODULE macro was added, but we >> don't have module.h >> >> This ch

Re: [PATCH] proc_devtree: fix THIS_MODULE without module.h

2010-01-09 Thread Alexey Dobriyan
On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 01:19:13PM +1100, Jeremy Kerr wrote: > Commit e22f628395432b967f2f505858c64450f7835365 introduced a build > breakage for ARM devtree work: the THIS_MODULE macro was added, but we > don't have module.h > > This change adds the necessary #include to get THIS_MODULE defined. >

[PATCH] proc_devtree: fix THIS_MODULE without module.h

2010-01-06 Thread Jeremy Kerr
Commit e22f628395432b967f2f505858c64450f7835365 introduced a build breakage for ARM devtree work: the THIS_MODULE macro was added, but we don't have module.h This change adds the necessary #include to get THIS_MODULE defined. While we could just replace it with NULL (PROC_FS is a bool, not a trist