From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751347AbcGOP4r (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 15 Jul 2016 11:56:47 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55035 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751000AbcGOP4p (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 15 Jul 2016 11:56:45 -0400
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 12:56:37 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: build failure after merge of the luto-misc tree
Message-ID: <20160715155637.GD2523@redhat.com>
References: <20160715170654.0b09a8bc@canb.auug.org.au>
 <20160715072243.GP30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20160715073119.GR30927@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20160715150903.GA2523@redhat.com>
 <20160715152436.GB2523@redhat.com>
 <20160715152937.GB3115@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160715152937.GB3115@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
X-Url: http://acmel.wordpress.com
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10)
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.26]); Fri, 15 Jul 2016 15:56:44 +0000 (UTC)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Em Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 05:29:37PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:24:36PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Seems ok, but I'll reinstate this:
> > 
> > #if BITS_PER_LONG != __BITS_PER_LONG
> > #error Inconsistent word size. Check asm/bitsperlong.h
> > #endif
> 
> Confuses me; why do we have two?
> 
> Why not then do:
> 
> #define BITS_PER_LONG __BITS_PER_LONG
> 
> and be done with it?

Well, I just kept existing kernel practice, it uses __BITS_PER_LONG in
uapi files and BITS_PER_LONG elsewhere, since we copy stuff from the
kernel and check when it drifts using diff, I kept it like that so that
automation could point us when the tools/ copy drifted from the original
file.

- Arnaldo