From: Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org>
To: Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] headers_check fix: arm, hwcap.h
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 14:20:11 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1244278211.2475.13.camel@ht.satnam> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090605204805.GA22367@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 21:48 +0100, Russell King wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 10:16:49PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 01:53:07PM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 05:57:56PM +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > > > fix the following 'make headers_check' warning:
> > >
> > > I think headers_check needs fixing - there's nothing wrong with the
> > > code as it presently stands except the tools obviously can't properly
> > > parse C preprocessor statements.
> >
> > You are correct that headers_ceck is limited here and this patch
> > take some valid code and refactor it to make it headers_check compatible.
>
> Okay, here's the question:
>
> Does userspace require anything in the ifdef __ASSEMBLY__ bits?
__ASSEMBLY__ is not specific to kernel. Any one can take benefit of it.
> In any case, passing -D__KERNEL__ or -U__KERNEL__ allows unifdef to
> do the right thing.
>
> The problem which unifdef has is that if it finds a symbol in an
> evaluation that it doesn't know about, it fails the expansion
> entirely, rather than checking whether the expansion always results
> in something which should be omitted. In other words:
>
> #if defined(__KERNEL__) && (<unknown>)
>
The problem is why you are trying to complex things which are simple and
straight.
#ifdef __KERNEL__ is for kernel
#ifndef __KERNEL__ is for userspace
Do not mix it with others defines, Whole kernel is following this
protocol why you need a exception ?
> results in basically an "unknown" answer from the evaluator, where
> we can see perfectly well that the expansion can never be true if
> __KERNEL__ is never set.
>
> So, the trivial answer to the problem if:
>
> #if defined(__KERNEL__) && something-depending-on-__ASSEMBLY__
>
> is to tell unifdef whether we want __ASSEMBLY__ defined or not defined.
> This does shut up the headers_install warning from ARMs hwdef.h.
>
#ifdef __KERNEL__
something-depending-on-__ASSEMBLY__
will not only shut up these warnings but also avoid confusion, keep
things simple and avoid unknown future problems.
My request to you please think bigger and look at bigger picture.
Thanks,
--
JSR
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-06 8:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-04 12:23 [PATCH 0/6] headers_check fix patches 20090604 Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-04 12:27 ` [PATCH 1/6] headers_check fix: arm, hwcap.h Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-04 12:29 ` [PATCH 2/6] headers_check fix: ia64, fpswa.h Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-04 12:31 ` [PATCH 3/6] headers_check fix: m68k, swab.h Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-04 12:35 ` [PATCH 4/6] headers_check fix: mips, ioctl.h Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-04 12:37 ` [PATCH 5/6] headers_check fix: mn10300, ptrace.h Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-04 12:38 ` [PATCH 6/6] headers_check fix: mn10300, setup.h Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-04 12:46 ` [PATCH 4/6] headers_check fix: mips, ioctl.h Ralf Baechle
2009-06-04 20:09 ` Sam Ravnborg
2009-06-05 9:34 ` Arnd Bergmann
2009-06-05 12:04 ` Ralf Baechle
2009-06-04 20:22 ` [PATCH 2/6] headers_check fix: ia64, fpswa.h Sam Ravnborg
2009-06-08 16:33 ` Luck, Tony
2009-06-08 17:48 ` [PATCH] ia64: unexport fpswa.h Sam Ravnborg
2009-06-05 9:26 ` [PATCH 2/6] headers_check fix: ia64, fpswa.h Arnd Bergmann
2009-06-04 12:53 ` [PATCH 1/6] headers_check fix: arm, hwcap.h Russell King
2009-06-04 15:45 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-04 20:16 ` Sam Ravnborg
2009-06-05 20:10 ` Russell King
2009-06-05 20:17 ` Robert P. J. Day
2009-06-05 20:48 ` Russell King
2009-06-05 21:24 ` Sam Ravnborg
2009-06-06 8:50 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput [this message]
2009-06-06 9:12 ` Russell King
2009-06-06 9:34 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-04 20:12 ` [PATCH 0/6] headers_check fix patches 20090604 Sam Ravnborg
2009-06-05 2:00 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-06 8:10 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-06 8:43 ` Sam Ravnborg
2009-06-06 9:09 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-06 12:54 ` [GIT PULL] headers_check fixes Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-06 13:02 ` Russell King
2009-06-06 13:34 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-06 13:41 ` Russell King
2009-06-06 14:39 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
2009-06-06 21:47 ` Russell King
2009-06-06 21:51 ` Russell King
2009-06-06 22:12 ` Sam Ravnborg
2009-06-06 23:24 ` Russell King
2009-06-07 7:09 ` Sam Ravnborg
2009-06-07 7:16 ` Sam Ravnborg
2009-06-07 10:15 ` Jaswinder Singh Rajput
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=1244278211.2475.13.camel@ht.satnam \
--to=jaswinder@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.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