[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2009 15:04:12 +0530
From: Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@...nel.org>
To: Russell King <rmk+lkml@....linux.org.uk>
Cc: Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] headers_check fix: arm, hwcap.h
On Sat, 2009-06-06 at 10:12 +0100, Russell King wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 06, 2009 at 02:20:11PM +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> >
> > The problem is why you are trying to complex things which are simple and
> > straight.
>
> What you're saying is "you may not follow valid C ways of expressing
> conditional compilation" to which I say "go and piss in someone elses
> pool".
>
Hmm, again you are trying to complex things.
Issue is not of valid C or not.
Issue is #if defined(__KERNEL__) && (<unknown>) is WRONG.
It should be :
#ifdef __KERNEL__
#ifdef <unknown>
otherwise how you will pass it to userspace.
Why you are looking on kernel side only why do not you think about user
space ?
please check how it will look at usr/include/asm-arm/hwcap.h
> Since the fix for this in unifdef is soo trivial, and it doesn't require
> people to write stuff in ways that stupid idiotic tools can understand,
> I'm NEVER going to apply the fix to hwdef.h.
>
> So you now have two options: either supply the (correct) additional
> parameter to unifdef, or ignore the stupid idiotic warning message.
>
I will go with 3rd option.
Thanks,
--
JSR
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists