From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752197AbcEIPZK (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 9 May 2016 11:25:10 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45184 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751413AbcEIPZG (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 9 May 2016 11:25:06 -0400
Date: Mon, 9 May 2016 17:25:02 +0200
From: Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= <rkrcmar@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Brooks Moses <bmoses@google.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ian Kasprzak <iankaz@google.com>
Subject: Re: Is BIT() in arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm.h defined? Where?
Message-ID: <20160509152502.GB12472@potion>
References: <CAOxa4KoexgsOU1m9FKtsYNsr-rL9FzGoEmYdvaLhyjkHanhKnw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20160505082423.GB534@pd.tnic>
 <573097F2.1090406@redhat.com>
 <20160509144712.GB7809@potion>
 <5730A98F.3080405@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <5730A98F.3080405@redhat.com>
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.28]); Mon, 09 May 2016 15:25:05 +0000 (UTC)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

2016-05-09 17:15+0200, Paolo Bonzini:
> On 09/05/2016 16:47, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>> 2016-05-09 16:00+0200, Paolo Bonzini:
>>> On 05/05/2016 10:24, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>>> On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 05:49:27PM -0700, Brooks Moses wrote:
>>>>> When I run "make ARCH=x86 headers_install", and then write a simple C
>>>>> file that #includes "asm/kvm.h" from the resulting tree, I get a
>>>>> compiler error: the BIT() macro used on line 219 of that file is
>>>>> undefined:
>>>>
>>>> The below patch should help...
>>>>
>>>> @Paulo: btw, any chance we can fix that "signifcant" typo :-) in
>>>> KVM_CPUID_FLAG_SIGNIFCANT_INDEX or is it user-visible and cast in
>>>> stone?
>>>
>>> Unfortuntely it is cast in stone.  The patch below is good though.
>> 
>> We can "fix" it by introducing a second name for the entry.  Do you
>> think it's worth?
> 
> I don't think so, but perhaps there are precedents for doing that?

I can't think of any, and it seems pointless to me ...