Commit 7957f0a8 authored by Linus Torvalds's avatar Linus Torvalds

Fix build failure due to hwirq.h needing smp_lock.h

Arnd Bergmann did an automated scripting run to find left-over instances
of <linux/smp_lock.h>, and had made it trigger it on the normal BKL use
of lock_kernel and unlock_lernel (and apparently release_kernel_lock and
reacquire_kernel_lock too, used by the scheduler).

That resulted in commit 451a3c24 ("BKL: remove extraneous #include

However, hardirq.h was the only remaining user of the old
'kernel_locked()' interface, and Arnd's script hadn't checked for that.
So depending on your configuration and what header files had been
included, you would get errors like "implicit declaration of function
'kernel_locked'" during the build.

The right fix is not to just re-instate the smp_lock.h include - it is
to just remove 'kernel_locked()' entirely, since the only use was this
one special low-level detail.  Just make hardirq.h do it directly.

In fact this simplifies and clarifies the code, because some trivial
analysis makes it clear that hardirq.h only ever used _one_ of the two
definitions of kernel_locked(), so we can remove the other one entirely.
Reported-by: default avatarZimny Lech <>
Reported-and-acked-by: default avatarRandy Dunlap <>
Acked-by: default avatarArnd Bergmann <>
Signed-off-by: default avatarLinus Torvalds <>
parent 460781b5
......@@ -96,7 +96,7 @@
#define in_nmi() (preempt_count() & NMI_MASK)
#if defined(CONFIG_PREEMPT) && defined(CONFIG_BKL)
# define PREEMPT_INATOMIC_BASE kernel_locked()
# define PREEMPT_INATOMIC_BASE (current->lock_depth >= 0)
......@@ -4,8 +4,6 @@
#include <linux/sched.h>
#define kernel_locked() (current->lock_depth >= 0)
extern int __lockfunc __reacquire_kernel_lock(void);
extern void __lockfunc __release_kernel_lock(void);
......@@ -58,7 +56,6 @@ static inline void cycle_kernel_lock(void)
#define lock_kernel()
#define unlock_kernel()
#define cycle_kernel_lock() do { } while(0)
#define kernel_locked() 1
#endif /* CONFIG_BKL */
#define release_kernel_lock(task) do { } while(0)
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment