From: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Thomas Weißschuh" <linux@weissschuh.net>,
"Nicolas Schier" <nsc@kernel.org>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Nick Huang <sef1548@gmail.com>,
linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2] scripts: headers_install.sh: Normalize __ASSEMBLY__ to __ASSEMBLER__
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 09:29:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260722072928.24500-1-thuth@redhat.com> (raw)
From: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
A previous patch to headers_install.sh normalized the usage of
__ASSEMBLER__ to __ASSEMBLY__ in the UAPI headers due to two reasons:
1) There was the concern that the UAPI headers might be used with
non-GCC-compatible compilers, which do not define __ASSEMBLER__
automatically.
But other C compilers like PCC (see
https://github.com/IanHarvey/pcc/blob/cvs2git/2018.09.20/cc/cc/cc.1#L405)
and Tiny-C (see https://repo.or.cz/tinycc.git/commitdiff/a25325e9be13e52a),
are defining __ASSEMBLER__ for compiling assembler files, too, so using
it in UAPI header files should really be fine.
2) During the migration phase, the UAPI headers will use a mix of *both*
__ASSEMBLY__ and __ASSEMBLER__ at the same time, which is ugly and
inconsistent.
That's true. But since we already shipped a couple of kernel versions
that used __ASSEMBLER__ in the UAPI headers for certain architectures,
we might now break user space programs that have been developed with
these kernel versions if we switch back to __ASSEMBLY__.
Thus let's better always use the macro that is defined by the compilers
and standardize on __ASSEMBLER__ instead of __ASSEMBLY__ in all of the
UAPI header files now.
Suggested-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@weissschuh.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/2030a963-33bc-43fe-9a2b-9c626d7d8360@redhat.com/
Reviewed-by: Nicolas Schier <n.schier@fritz.com>
Tested-by: Nicolas Schier <n.schier@fritz.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
---
v2: Updated patch description
| 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
--git a/scripts/headers_install.sh b/scripts/headers_install.sh
index 83e4475968781..2f1d1767ca267 100755
--- a/scripts/headers_install.sh
+++ b/scripts/headers_install.sh
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ sed -E -e '
s/(^|[^a-zA-Z0-9])__packed([^a-zA-Z0-9_]|$)/\1__attribute__((packed))\2/g
s/(^|[[:space:](])(inline|asm|volatile)([[:space:](]|$)/\1__\2__\3/g
s@#(ifndef|define|endif[[:space:]]*/[*])[[:space:]]*_UAPI@#\1 @
- s/__ASSEMBLER__/__ASSEMBLY__/g
+ s/__ASSEMBLY__/__ASSEMBLER__/g
' $INFILE > $TMPFILE || exit 1
scripts/unifdef -U__KERNEL__ -D__EXPORTED_HEADERS__ $TMPFILE > $OUTFILE
--
2.55.0
reply other threads:[~2026-07-22 7:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=20260722072928.24500-1-thuth@redhat.com \
--to=thuth@redhat.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@weissschuh.net \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=nsc@kernel.org \
--cc=sef1548@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox