From: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
loongson-kernel@lists.loongnix.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] Unify uapi bitsperlong.h
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2023 11:34:38 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAP-5=fWmPQ9vtH1t9pSPCPBiOFxQQe43C7Bk4amLS08ASAnwGg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1412dbaf-56f4-418b-85ea-681b1c44cc26@app.fastmail.com>
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 8:10 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023, at 16:13, Tiezhu Yang wrote:
> > v3:
> > -- Check the definition of __BITS_PER_LONG first at
> > the beginning of uapi/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h
> >
Thanks for doing this cleanup! I just wanted to report an issue I ran
into with building the Linux perf tool. The header guard in:
tools/include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/tools/include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h
Caused an issue with building:
tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c
The issue was that cs-etm.c would #include a system header, which
would transitively include a header with the same header guard. This
led to the tools/include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h being ignored and
the compilation of tools/perf/util/cs-etm.c failing due to a missing
define. My local workaround is:
```
diff --git a/tools/include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h
b/tools/include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h
index 2093d56ddd11..88508a35cb45 100644
--- a/tools/include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h
+++ b/tools/include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
-#ifndef __ASM_GENERIC_BITS_PER_LONG
-#define __ASM_GENERIC_BITS_PER_LONG
+#ifndef __LINUX_TOOLS_ASM_GENERIC_BITS_PER_LONG
+#define __LINUX_TOOLS_ASM_GENERIC_BITS_PER_LONG
#include <uapi/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h>
@@ -21,4 +21,4 @@
#define small_const_nbits(nbits) \
(__builtin_constant_p(nbits) && (nbits) <= BITS_PER_LONG && (nbits) > 0)
-#endif /* __ASM_GENERIC_BITS_PER_LONG */
+#endif /* __LINUX_TOOLS_ASM_GENERIC_BITS_PER_LONG */
```
I'm not sure if a wider fix is necessary for this, but I thought it
worthwhile to report that there are potential issues. I don't think we
can use #pragma once, as an alternative to header guards, to avoid
this kind of name collision.
Thanks,
Ian
> > v2:
> > -- Check __CHAR_BIT__ and __SIZEOF_LONG__ rather than
> > __aarch64__, __riscv, __loongarch__, thanks Ruoyao
> > -- Update the code comment and commit message
> >
> > v1:
> > -- Rebase on 6.4-rc6
> > -- Only unify uapi bitsperlong.h for arm64, riscv and loongarch
> > -- Remove uapi bitsperlong.h of hexagon and microblaze in a new patch
> >
> > Here is the RFC patch:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arch/1683615903-10862-1-git-send-email-yangtiezhu@loongson.cn/
>
> I've applied these to the asm-generic tree now
>
> Thanks,
>
> Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-14 18:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-22 14:13 [PATCH v3 0/2] Unify uapi bitsperlong.h Tiezhu Yang
2023-06-22 14:13 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] asm-generic: Unify uapi bitsperlong.h for arm64, riscv and loongarch Tiezhu Yang
2023-07-27 21:36 ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-07-28 11:00 ` Arnd Bergmann
2023-07-28 17:31 ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-07-28 20:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
2023-07-28 23:44 ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-07-29 7:59 ` Arnd Bergmann
2023-07-29 17:46 ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-07-29 21:12 ` Arnd Bergmann
2023-07-31 16:04 ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-06-22 14:13 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] tools arch: Remove uapi bitsperlong.h of hexagon and microblaze Tiezhu Yang
2023-06-22 15:09 ` [PATCH v3 0/2] Unify uapi bitsperlong.h Arnd Bergmann
2023-07-14 18:34 ` Ian Rogers [this message]
2023-07-14 19:56 ` Arnd Bergmann
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='CAP-5=fWmPQ9vtH1t9pSPCPBiOFxQQe43C7Bk4amLS08ASAnwGg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=irogers@google.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=loongarch@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=loongson-kernel@lists.loongnix.cn \
--cc=yangtiezhu@loongson.cn \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).