linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 41/45] include/uapi/sound/emu10k1.h: hide gpr_valid, tram_valid and code

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Wed, 11 Mar 2015 10:46:29 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
Cc:	Mikko Rapeli <mikko.rapeli@....fi>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
	linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 41/45] include/uapi/sound/emu10k1.h: hide gpr_valid, tram_valid and code_valid in userspace

On Wednesday 11 March 2015 07:11:18 Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Wed, 11 Mar 2015 03:22:04 +0200,
> Mikko Rapeli wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 07:27:38AM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > At Tue, 17 Feb 2015 00:05:44 +0100,
> > > Mikko Rapeli wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > The DECLARE_BITMAP macro is not available in userspace headers.
> > > > Fixes userspace compile error:
> > > > error: expected specifier-qualifier-list before ‘DECLARE_BITMAP’
> > > 
> > > It's nonsense.  This results in an incompatible structure, thus ABI
> > > would be broken completely (actually this will break the compile of
> > > ld10k1).
> > 
> > None of the exported headers after 'make headers_install' have definition
> > of DECLARE_BITMAP macro. It is defined in include/linux/types.h which is
> > different from include/uapi/linux/types.h and missing this definition and
> > a few other things.
> > 
> > One option would be add DECLARE_BITMAP macro to include/uapi/linux/types.h
> > and add include/linux/bitops.h to uapi.
> > 
> > Thoughts?
> 
> Are there any other headers like that?  If this is the only one, leave
> it as is.  The only program that reads this are some alsa-tools ones
> and they have already own DECLARE_BITMAP() definition.  Adding the
> extra definition here will even break the compilation out of sudden.

I think it's a worthy goal to have the header files be compilable
standalone, but I don't think we should make the DECLARE_BITMAP()
macro globally visible in user space, in particular because it will
clash with every instance in which user space has a macro of the
same name.

What we could do here is to add a private copy of the macro to emu10k1.h
under a different name, such as __EMU10K1_DECLARE_BITMAP().

	Arnd
--
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/