From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Weimer Subject: Re: [PATCH] uapi: avoid namespace conflict in linux/posix_types.h Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 20:02:39 +0200 Message-ID: <87k1dkdr9c.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> References: <20190319165123.3967889-1-arnd@arndb.de> <87tvd2j9ye.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <871s05fd8o.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <87sgs8igfj.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: In-Reply-To: (Linus Torvalds's message of "Mon, 17 Jun 2019 10:49:44 -0700") Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Joseph Myers , Arnd Bergmann , Linux API , linux-arch , Netdev , Laura Abbott , Paul Burton , Deepa Dinamani , Linux List Kernel Mailing List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org * Linus Torvalds: >> A different approach would rename to something more >> basic, exclude the two structs, and move all internal #includes which do >> need the structs to the new header. > > In fact, I wouldn't even rename at all, I'd just make > sure it's namespace-clean. > > I _think_ the only thing causing problems is '__kernel_fsid_t' due to > that "val[]" thing, so just remove ity entirely, and add it to > instead. There's also __kernel_fd_set in . I may have lumped this up with , but it has the same problem. If it's okay to move them both to more natural places (maybe and ), I think that should work well for glibc. However, application code may have to include additional header files. I think the GCC/LLVM sanitizers currently get __kernel_fd_set from (but I think we discussed it before, they really shouldn't use this type because it's misleading). Thanks, Florian From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:50144 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726047AbfFQSCw (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jun 2019 14:02:52 -0400 From: Florian Weimer Subject: Re: [PATCH] uapi: avoid namespace conflict in linux/posix_types.h References: <20190319165123.3967889-1-arnd@arndb.de> <87tvd2j9ye.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <871s05fd8o.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <87sgs8igfj.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 20:02:39 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Linus Torvalds's message of "Mon, 17 Jun 2019 10:49:44 -0700") Message-ID: <87k1dkdr9c.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Joseph Myers , Arnd Bergmann , Linux API , linux-arch , Netdev , Laura Abbott , Paul Burton , Deepa Dinamani , Linux List Kernel Mailing Message-ID: <20190617180239.Hc4eXVR_C_vNNOQMvgbdvdkEDLONSeqcqvPZsLV5jOg@z> * Linus Torvalds: >> A different approach would rename to something more >> basic, exclude the two structs, and move all internal #includes which do >> need the structs to the new header. > > In fact, I wouldn't even rename at all, I'd just make > sure it's namespace-clean. > > I _think_ the only thing causing problems is '__kernel_fsid_t' due to > that "val[]" thing, so just remove ity entirely, and add it to > instead. There's also __kernel_fd_set in . I may have lumped this up with , but it has the same problem. If it's okay to move them both to more natural places (maybe and ), I think that should work well for glibc. However, application code may have to include additional header files. I think the GCC/LLVM sanitizers currently get __kernel_fd_set from (but I think we discussed it before, they really shouldn't use this type because it's misleading). Thanks, Florian