Re: [PATCH v5 12/36] bit_spinlock: Include missing <asm/processor.h>

Bart Van Assche <[email protected]> Fri, 19 Dec 2025 12:38:32 -0800

Newsgroups	org.kernel.vger.linux-sparse,dev.linux.lists.llvm,org.kernel.vger.linux-crypto,org.kernel.vger.linux-doc,org.kernel.vger.linux-kbuild,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-security-module,org.kernel.vger.linux-wireless,org.kernel.vger.rcu,org.kvack.linux-mm
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

On 12/19/25 7:40 AM, Marco Elver wrote:
> Including <linux/bit_spinlock.h> into an empty TU will result in the
> compiler complaining:
> 
> ./include/linux/bit_spinlock.h:34:4: error: call to undeclared function 'cpu_relax'; <...>
>     34 |                         cpu_relax();
>        |                         ^
> 1 error generated.
> 
> Include <asm/processor.h> to allow including bit_spinlock.h where
> <asm/processor.h> is not otherwise included.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <[email protected]>
> ---
>   include/linux/bit_spinlock.h | 2 ++
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h
> index c0989b5b0407..59e345f74b0e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bit_spinlock.h
> @@ -7,6 +7,8 @@
>   #include <linux/atomic.h>
>   #include <linux/bug.h>
>   
> +#include <asm/processor.h>  /* for cpu_relax() */
> +
>   /*
>    *  bit-based spin_lock()
>    *

The abbreviation "TU" is uncommon so it's probably a good idea to expand
it. Anyway:

Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche <[email protected]>