[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160122111918.GA9806@pd.tnic>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 12:19:18 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] x86/cpufeature: Carve out X86_FEATURE_*
On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 08:03:40PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:57:06AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > On 01/21/16 10:34, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > > +#ifndef _ASM_X86_REQUIRED_FEATURES_H
> >
> > Why do we have all these include guards at the point of the #include?
> > This is not standard procedure.
>
> Some uapi monkey business:
>
> abbf1590de22 ("UAPI: Partition the header include path sets and add uapi/ header directories")
>
> The funny thing is, the headers themselves have the guards too. I'll try
> to remove them to see what breaks.
Ah, here it is:
In file included from arch/x86/boot/mkcpustr.c:20:0:
arch/x86/boot/../include/asm/cpufeatures.h:4:35: fatal error: asm/required-features.h: No such file or directory
compilation terminated.
make[1]: *** [arch/x86/boot/mkcpustr] Error 1
make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
make: *** [bzImage] Error 2
make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
That's when you remove the #ifndef guards.
And I think the commit above does this special dancing to keep
cpufeature.h a kernel-only header and not make it an uapi one. David, am
I close?
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists