All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
	Keir Fraser <keir.xen@gmail.com>
Subject: headers.chk failing under certain circumstances.
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2011 13:38:40 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EE75560.4090703@citrix.com> (raw)

Hello,

Back in changeset 19772:aaab04808ee7, you introduced headers.chk to
check the header files for ansi conformance.

To fix the current 32/64bit interaction errors with the kexec
hypercalls, I need to use uint64_aligned_t as a datatype.  For the
normal compile, this is all fine, but as header.chk does not define
__XEN__ or __XEN_TOOLS__, the declaration of uint64_aligned_t is never
made, leading to the check failing.

There are other hypercall interfaces which use these datatypes: domctl,
sysctl and hvm_op, but these header files are explicitly filtered out
from the prerequisites for header.chk.  Given that uint64_aligned_t is a
sensible datatype to be using with the hypercall interface, fixing the
check seems to be the correct solution.

In your oppinion, which is the best course of action? To define __XEN__
or __XEN_TOOLS__ as part of the check (this throws up other errors as
part of the check process, suggesting that the header files are hiding
ansi non-conformance in certain blocks), or dont predicate the
definition of uint64_aligned_t on the presence of the above defines?

In addition, why are certain header files excluded from being checked? 
Does this imply that then should be fixed up to be ansi conformant as well?

-- 
Andrew Cooper - Dom0 Kernel Engineer, Citrix XenServer
T: +44 (0)1223 225 900, http://www.citrix.com

             reply	other threads:[~2011-12-13 13:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-12-13 13:38 Andrew Cooper [this message]
2011-12-13 14:17 ` headers.chk failing under certain circumstances Jan Beulich
2011-12-13 14:21   ` Keir Fraser
2011-12-13 14:25     ` Jan Beulich
2011-12-13 14:34       ` Andrew Cooper

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4EE75560.4090703@citrix.com \
    --to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
    --cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=keir.xen@gmail.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.