From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michal Marek Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] kbuild changes for v4.9-rc1 Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 16:48:48 +0100 Message-ID: <7b7c237c-c779-f695-e320-d9e00e48d1d2@suse.com> References: <20161017100130.GA16013@angband.pl> <871szfb1x1.fsf@gmail.com> <20161018001626.GA5976@angband.pl> <20161018123418.6121175b@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20161018123418.6121175b@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Nicholas Piggin , Adam Borowski Cc: Mathieu OTHACEHE , Omar Sandoval , Linus Torvalds , adobriyan@gmail.com, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On 2016-10-18 03:34, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > Hi Adam, > > Thanks, this is looking good. powerpc will be able to use the generic > header. > > On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 02:16:26 +0200 > Adam Borowski wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 02:22:34PM +0200, Mathieu OTHACEHE wrote: >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>> >>> Included twice. >> >> D'oh! >> >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> + >>>> +#include >>>> + >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>> >>> No for __sw_hweight32 and __sw_hweight64 ? >> >> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/asm-prototypes.h b/include/asm-generic/asm-prototypes.h >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..df13637 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/include/asm-generic/asm-prototypes.h >> @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ >> +#include >> >> ... which has these. >> >> Alexey Dobriyan wrote: >> } bitops.h is wrong header as well. >> } Why do you need bitops for bunch of function prototypes? >> >> Unless you guys prefer using low-level headers only, that is. > > Well you can't use asm/arch_hweight.h in a generic header of course. > I would suggest just including linux/ variants where practical for > the asm-generic/asm-prototypes.h header. > > We should probably just bring all these arch patches through the > kbuild tree. Adam, are you submitting a new version of your x86 asm-prototypes.h patch? Thanks, Michal From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:52094 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750749AbcKAPsy (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Nov 2016 11:48:54 -0400 Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] kbuild changes for v4.9-rc1 References: <20161017100130.GA16013@angband.pl> <871szfb1x1.fsf@gmail.com> <20161018001626.GA5976@angband.pl> <20161018123418.6121175b@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> From: Michal Marek Message-ID: <7b7c237c-c779-f695-e320-d9e00e48d1d2@suse.com> Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 16:48:48 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20161018123418.6121175b@roar.ozlabs.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Nicholas Piggin , Adam Borowski Cc: Mathieu OTHACEHE , Omar Sandoval , Linus Torvalds , adobriyan@gmail.com, sfr@canb.auug.org.au, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20161101154848.HUTC1FbmjzezRKPRJscqCIsPbY_HidhL6Vvqwo5zrQ4@z> On 2016-10-18 03:34, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > Hi Adam, > > Thanks, this is looking good. powerpc will be able to use the generic > header. > > On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 02:16:26 +0200 > Adam Borowski wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 02:22:34PM +0200, Mathieu OTHACEHE wrote: >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>> >>> Included twice. >> >> D'oh! >> >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> + >>>> +#include >>>> + >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>>> +#include >>> >>> No for __sw_hweight32 and __sw_hweight64 ? >> >> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/asm-prototypes.h b/include/asm-generic/asm-prototypes.h >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000..df13637 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/include/asm-generic/asm-prototypes.h >> @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ >> +#include >> >> ... which has these. >> >> Alexey Dobriyan wrote: >> } bitops.h is wrong header as well. >> } Why do you need bitops for bunch of function prototypes? >> >> Unless you guys prefer using low-level headers only, that is. > > Well you can't use asm/arch_hweight.h in a generic header of course. > I would suggest just including linux/ variants where practical for > the asm-generic/asm-prototypes.h header. > > We should probably just bring all these arch patches through the > kbuild tree. Adam, are you submitting a new version of your x86 asm-prototypes.h patch? Thanks, Michal