public inbox for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ian.Campbell@citrix.com (Ian Campbell)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] arm64: remove PSR bit macros from uapi
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:06:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1365782789.15783.113.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1365781834.15783.107.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>

On Fri, 2013-04-12 at 16:50 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> I'm not sure which (if any) spec includes ptrace.h but signal.h isn't
> defined to #define PSR_FOO. Maybe the real bug is the signal.h ends up
> including ptrace.h at all?

Having spoken to someone who understands this stuff better than I
(although I still reserve the right to be talking out my a**e) it
appears this is the case. ptrace.h is allowed to define whatever it
likes because it's not defined by a standard but signal.h is specified
by POSIX and is not allowed to define anything which isn't in the POSIX
reserved namespace or which isn't explicitly mentions, which PSR_* is
not.

So it seems like the bug is on the libc side for including this
particular #include chain?

On the flip side is there any reason for the Linux uapi headers to be
including architectural constants? e.g. the x86 uapi/ptrace.h doesn't
define the RFLAGS bits etc...

Ian.

  reply	other threads:[~2013-04-12 16:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-04-12 15:09 [PATCH] arm64: remove PSR bit macros from uapi Ian Campbell
2013-04-12 15:18 ` Will Deacon
2013-04-12 15:50   ` Ian Campbell
2013-04-12 16:06     ` Ian Campbell [this message]
2013-04-12 16:17       ` [Xen-devel] " Marc Zyngier
2013-04-15 11:48         ` Ian Campbell
2013-04-15 12:28           ` Ian Campbell

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=1365782789.15783.113.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com \
    --to=ian.campbell@citrix.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox