linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
	Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
	Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
	Alexander Aring <alex.aring@gmail.com>,
	Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
	Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
	Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] uapi/fcntl: conditionally define AT_RENAME* macros
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2025 16:54:50 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <9b2c8fe2-cf17-445b-abd7-a1ed44812a73@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aKuedOXEIapocQ8l@casper.infradead.org>



On 8/24/25 4:21 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2025 at 03:10:55PM -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> Don't define the AT_RENAME_* macros when __USE_GNU is defined since
>> /usr/include/stdio.h defines them in that case (i.e. when _GNU_SOURCE
>> is defined, which causes __USE_GNU to be defined).
>>
>> Having them defined in 2 places causes build warnings (duplicate
>> definitions) in both samples/watch_queue/watch_test.c and
>> samples/vfs/test-statx.c.
> 
> It does?  What flags?
> 

for samples/vfs/test-statx.c:

In file included from ../samples/vfs/test-statx.c:23:
usr/include/linux/fcntl.h:159:9: warning: ‘AT_RENAME_NOREPLACE’ redefined
  159 | #define AT_RENAME_NOREPLACE     0x0001
In file included from ../samples/vfs/test-statx.c:13:
/usr/include/stdio.h:171:10: note: this is the location of the previous definition
  171 | # define AT_RENAME_NOREPLACE RENAME_NOREPLACE
usr/include/linux/fcntl.h:160:9: warning: ‘AT_RENAME_EXCHANGE’ redefined
  160 | #define AT_RENAME_EXCHANGE      0x0002
/usr/include/stdio.h:173:10: note: this is the location of the previous definition
  173 | # define AT_RENAME_EXCHANGE RENAME_EXCHANGE
usr/include/linux/fcntl.h:161:9: warning: ‘AT_RENAME_WHITEOUT’ redefined
  161 | #define AT_RENAME_WHITEOUT      0x0004
/usr/include/stdio.h:175:10: note: this is the location of the previous definition
  175 | # define AT_RENAME_WHITEOUT RENAME_WHITEOUT

for samples/watch_queue/watch_test.c:

In file included from usr/include/linux/watch_queue.h:6,
                 from ../samples/watch_queue/watch_test.c:19:
usr/include/linux/fcntl.h:159:9: warning: ‘AT_RENAME_NOREPLACE’ redefined
  159 | #define AT_RENAME_NOREPLACE     0x0001
In file included from ../samples/watch_queue/watch_test.c:11:
/usr/include/stdio.h:171:10: note: this is the location of the previous definition
  171 | # define AT_RENAME_NOREPLACE RENAME_NOREPLACE
usr/include/linux/fcntl.h:160:9: warning: ‘AT_RENAME_EXCHANGE’ redefined
  160 | #define AT_RENAME_EXCHANGE      0x0002
/usr/include/stdio.h:173:10: note: this is the location of the previous definition
  173 | # define AT_RENAME_EXCHANGE RENAME_EXCHANGE
usr/include/linux/fcntl.h:161:9: warning: ‘AT_RENAME_WHITEOUT’ redefined
  161 | #define AT_RENAME_WHITEOUT      0x0004
/usr/include/stdio.h:175:10: note: this is the location of the previous definition
  175 | # define AT_RENAME_WHITEOUT RENAME_WHITEOUT


> #define AT_RENAME_NOREPLACE     0x0001
> #define AT_RENAME_NOREPLACE     0x0001
> 
> int main(void)
> {
> 	return AT_RENAME_NOREPLACE;
> }
> 
> gcc -W -Wall testA.c -o testA
> 
> (no warnings)
> 
> I'm pretty sure C says that duplicate definitions are fine as long
> as they're identical.
The vales are identical but the strings are not identical.

We can't fix stdio.h, but we could just change uapi/linux/fcntl.h
to match stdio.h. I suppose.

-- 
~Randy


  reply	other threads:[~2025-08-24 23:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-08-24 22:10 [PATCH] uapi/fcntl: conditionally define AT_RENAME* macros Randy Dunlap
2025-08-24 23:21 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-08-24 23:54   ` Randy Dunlap [this message]
2025-08-25  5:58     ` Amir Goldstein
2025-08-25  6:49       ` Randy Dunlap
2025-08-25 13:03     ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-08-25 17:52       ` Randy Dunlap
2025-08-25 18:45         ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-08-25 19:29           ` Randy Dunlap

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=9b2c8fe2-cf17-445b-abd7-a1ed44812a73@infradead.org \
    --to=rdunlap@infradead.org \
    --cc=alex.aring@gmail.com \
    --cc=amir73il@gmail.com \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
    --cc=cyphar@cyphar.com \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
    --cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=willy@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).