From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934336Ab2LISDE (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Dec 2012 13:03:04 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:21237 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934297Ab2LISDC (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 Dec 2012 13:03:02 -0500 Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: <20121208144944.GF12011@gmail.com> References: <20121208144944.GF12011@gmail.com> <26921.1354542035@warthog.procyon.org.uk> To: Ingo Molnar Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Ingo Molnar , hpa@zytor.com, Thomas Gleixner , x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] UAPI: Disintegrate arch/x86/include/asm Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 18:02:50 +0000 Message-ID: <17310.1355076170@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Ingo Molnar wrote: > arch/x86/include/asm/Kbuild | 7 ++ > arch/x86/include/asm/perf_regs.h | 33 --------- > arch/x86/include/asm/svm.h | 132 +--------------------------------- > arch/x86/include/asm/vmx.h | 89 +---------------------- > arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/Kbuild | 3 + > arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/perf_regs.h | 33 +++++++++ > arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/svm.h | 132 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/vmx.h | 109 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 8 files changed, 289 insertions(+), 249 deletions(-) > > What are these changes - it seems perf and KVM related. Only in passing. The header files you indicated are marked as being exported to userspace in Kbuild - therefore they get disintegrated around __KERNEL__ conditionals just like all the other UAPI-relevant headers. > Is the latest version above 100% bug-free, with no known > problems whatsoever? It builds perf for me. No idea if perf works, I've never used it. I waved a branch including the patch on top of all my perf patches towards Arnaldo and others, but I don't know if they've tried it. I've also checked that x86_64 allyesconfig and i386 allmodconfig build and that an x86_64 kernel built with my test machine's usual config builds and boots. So, no known problems. David