linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf: Fix UAPI fallout

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <30780.1350653737@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date:	Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:35:37 +0100
From:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc:	dhowells@...hat.com,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	paulus@...ba.org, davem@...emloft.net, jaxboe@...ionio.com,
	tj@...nel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: Fix UAPI fallout

Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:

> What we want in .c files are not ../.. inclusions but the 
> 'seemless' <linux/abc.h> inclusions. Which is the overwhelming 
> majority, gladly. Do we want to make that the 100% majority?

I think this is going to be necessary for when x86 gets merged.  x86's
asm/unistd.h #includes uapi/asm/unistd.h, so you can't manually specify the
header without also specifying a -I flag.

I've been having a prod at it, and this seems to partially work:

	-BASIC_CFLAGS = -Iutil/include -Iarch/$(ARCH)/include -I$(OUTPUT)util -I$(TRACE_EVENT_DIR) -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_GNU_SOURCE
	+$(info XXX $(srctree))
	+
	+BASIC_CFLAGS = -Iutil/include -Iarch/$(ARCH)/include -I../../arch/$(ARCH)/include -I$(OUTPUT)util -I$(TRACE_EVENT_DIR) -D_LARGEFILE64_SOURCE -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_GNU_SOURCE

However, I'm trying to work out what will happen if this is run in a separate
output dir, but if I do:

	make tools/perf O=build_dir

from the bottom directory, I get:

	scripts/Makefile.include:2: *** O=build_dir does not exist.  Stop.

The problem is that the bottom-level Makefile does this:

	tools/: FORCE
		$(Q)$(MAKE) LDFLAGS= MAKEFLAGS= -C $(src)/tools/
	tools/%: FORCE
		$(Q)$(MAKE) LDFLAGS= MAKEFLAGS= -C $(src)/tools/ $*

which changes the directory, rendering a relative O= that would be good for
building the normal kernel useless for building a tool.  Should these rules
respecify the O= flag here, or should we give an error if someone tries it?

David
--
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/