[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0fd91233-0286-43fc-985f-8aab2d4f299c@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2025 07:26:13 +0100
From: Thomas Huth <thuth@...hat.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tip-bot2 for Thomas Huth <tip-bot2@...utronix.de>,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
x86@...nel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [tip: x86/headers] x86/headers: Replace __ASSEMBLY__ with
__ASSEMBLER__ in UAPI headers
On 12/03/2025 02.15, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On March 10, 2025 4:29:34 AM PDT, tip-bot2 for Thomas Huth <tip-bot2@...utronix.de> wrote:
>> The following commit has been merged into the x86/headers branch of tip:
>>
>> Commit-ID: e28eecf2602bdce826833ccb9a6b7a6bacafd98b
>> Gitweb: https://git.kernel.org/tip/e28eecf2602bdce826833ccb9a6b7a6bacafd98b
>> Author: Thomas Huth <thuth@...hat.com>
>> AuthorDate: Mon, 10 Mar 2025 11:42:56 +01:00
>> Committer: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
>> CommitterDate: Mon, 10 Mar 2025 12:18:42 +01:00
>>
>> x86/headers: Replace __ASSEMBLY__ with __ASSEMBLER__ in UAPI headers
>>
>> __ASSEMBLY__ is only defined by the Makefile of the kernel, so
>> this is not really useful for UAPI headers (unless the userspace
>> Makefile defines it, too). Let's switch to __ASSEMBLER__ which
>> gets set automatically by the compiler when compiling assembly
>> code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@...hat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
>> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
>> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
>> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>> Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>
>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250310104256.123527-1-thuth@redhat.com
>> ---
>> arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/bootparam.h | 4 ++--
>> arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/e820.h | 4 ++--
>> arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ldt.h | 4 ++--
>> arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/msr.h | 4 ++--
>> arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ptrace-abi.h | 6 +++---
>> arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ptrace.h | 4 ++--
>> arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/setup_data.h | 4 ++--
>> arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/signal.h | 8 ++++----
>> 8 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/bootparam.h b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/bootparam.h
>> index 9b82eeb..dafbf58 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/bootparam.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/bootparam.h
>> @@ -26,7 +26,7 @@
>> #define XLF_5LEVEL_ENABLED (1<<6)
>> #define XLF_MEM_ENCRYPTION (1<<7)
>>
>> -#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>> +#ifndef __ASSEMBLER__
>>
>> #include <linux/types.h>
>> #include <linux/screen_info.h>
>> @@ -210,6 +210,6 @@ enum x86_hardware_subarch {
>> X86_NR_SUBARCHS,
>> };
>>
>> -#endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
>> +#endif /* __ASSEMBLER__ */
>>
>> #endif /* _ASM_X86_BOOTPARAM_H */
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/e820.h b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/e820.h
>> index 2f491ef..55bc668 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/e820.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/e820.h
>> @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@
>> */
>> #define E820_RESERVED_KERN 128
>>
>> -#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>> +#ifndef __ASSEMBLER__
>> #include <linux/types.h>
>> struct e820entry {
>> __u64 addr; /* start of memory segment */
>> @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ struct e820map {
>> #define BIOS_ROM_BASE 0xffe00000
>> #define BIOS_ROM_END 0xffffffff
>>
>> -#endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
>> +#endif /* __ASSEMBLER__ */
>>
>>
>> #endif /* _UAPI_ASM_X86_E820_H */
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ldt.h b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ldt.h
>> index d62ac5d..a82c039 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ldt.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ldt.h
>> @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
>> /* The size of each LDT entry. */
>> #define LDT_ENTRY_SIZE 8
>>
>> -#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>> +#ifndef __ASSEMBLER__
>> /*
>> * Note on 64bit base and limit is ignored and you cannot set DS/ES/CS
>> * not to the default values if you still want to do syscalls. This
>> @@ -44,5 +44,5 @@ struct user_desc {
>> #define MODIFY_LDT_CONTENTS_STACK 1
>> #define MODIFY_LDT_CONTENTS_CODE 2
>>
>> -#endif /* !__ASSEMBLY__ */
>> +#endif /* !__ASSEMBLER__ */
>> #endif /* _ASM_X86_LDT_H */
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/msr.h b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/msr.h
>> index e7516b4..4b8917c 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/msr.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/msr.h
>> @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
>> #ifndef _UAPI_ASM_X86_MSR_H
>> #define _UAPI_ASM_X86_MSR_H
>>
>> -#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>> +#ifndef __ASSEMBLER__
>>
>> #include <linux/types.h>
>> #include <linux/ioctl.h>
>> @@ -10,5 +10,5 @@
>> #define X86_IOC_RDMSR_REGS _IOWR('c', 0xA0, __u32[8])
>> #define X86_IOC_WRMSR_REGS _IOWR('c', 0xA1, __u32[8])
>>
>> -#endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
>> +#endif /* __ASSEMBLER__ */
>> #endif /* _UAPI_ASM_X86_MSR_H */
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ptrace-abi.h b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ptrace-abi.h
>> index 16074b9..5823584 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ptrace-abi.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ptrace-abi.h
>> @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@
>>
>> #else /* __i386__ */
>>
>> -#if defined(__ASSEMBLY__) || defined(__FRAME_OFFSETS)
>> +#if defined(__ASSEMBLER__) || defined(__FRAME_OFFSETS)
>> /*
>> * C ABI says these regs are callee-preserved. They aren't saved on kernel entry
>> * unless syscall needs a complete, fully filled "struct pt_regs".
>> @@ -57,7 +57,7 @@
>> #define EFLAGS 144
>> #define RSP 152
>> #define SS 160
>> -#endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
>> +#endif /* __ASSEMBLER__ */
>>
>> /* top of stack page */
>> #define FRAME_SIZE 168
>> @@ -87,7 +87,7 @@
>>
>> #define PTRACE_SINGLEBLOCK 33 /* resume execution until next branch */
>>
>> -#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>> +#ifndef __ASSEMBLER__
>> #include <linux/types.h>
>> #endif
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ptrace.h b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ptrace.h
>> index 85165c0..e0b5b4f 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ptrace.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/ptrace.h
>> @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
>> #include <asm/processor-flags.h>
>>
>>
>> -#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>> +#ifndef __ASSEMBLER__
>>
>> #ifdef __i386__
>> /* this struct defines the way the registers are stored on the
>> @@ -81,6 +81,6 @@ struct pt_regs {
>>
>>
>>
>> -#endif /* !__ASSEMBLY__ */
>> +#endif /* !__ASSEMBLER__ */
>>
>> #endif /* _UAPI_ASM_X86_PTRACE_H */
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/setup_data.h b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/setup_data.h
>> index b111b0c..50c45ea 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/setup_data.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/setup_data.h
>> @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@
>> #define SETUP_INDIRECT (1<<31)
>> #define SETUP_TYPE_MAX (SETUP_ENUM_MAX | SETUP_INDIRECT)
>>
>> -#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>> +#ifndef __ASSEMBLER__
>>
>> #include <linux/types.h>
>>
>> @@ -78,6 +78,6 @@ struct ima_setup_data {
>> __u64 size;
>> } __attribute__((packed));
>>
>> -#endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
>> +#endif /* __ASSEMBLER__ */
>>
>> #endif /* _UAPI_ASM_X86_SETUP_DATA_H */
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/signal.h b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/signal.h
>> index f777346..1067efa 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/signal.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/signal.h
>> @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
>> #ifndef _UAPI_ASM_X86_SIGNAL_H
>> #define _UAPI_ASM_X86_SIGNAL_H
>>
>> -#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>> +#ifndef __ASSEMBLER__
>> #include <linux/types.h>
>> #include <linux/compiler.h>
>>
>> @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ struct siginfo;
>> typedef unsigned long sigset_t;
>>
>> #endif /* __KERNEL__ */
>> -#endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
>> +#endif /* __ASSEMBLER__ */
>>
>>
>> #define SIGHUP 1
>> @@ -68,7 +68,7 @@ typedef unsigned long sigset_t;
>>
>> #include <asm-generic/signal-defs.h>
>>
>> -#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__
>> +#ifndef __ASSEMBLER__
>>
>>
>> # ifndef __KERNEL__
>> @@ -106,6 +106,6 @@ typedef struct sigaltstack {
>> __kernel_size_t ss_size;
>> } stack_t;
>>
>> -#endif /* __ASSEMBLY__ */
>> +#endif /* __ASSEMBLER__ */
>>
>> #endif /* _UAPI_ASM_X86_SIGNAL_H */
>
> Wouldn't it be better to replace this everywhere for consistency?
Yes, also suggested by Arnd here:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-s390/1be19a7f-f43c-4025-8cf9-5f831c4125f5@app.fastmail.com/
I'll try to come up with a patch series in the next days. I think I'll keep
separate patches for the different architectures and uapi vs. non-uapi, so
that it is easier to review and split again in case it is necessary, so it
should be ok to keep this patch here - or if you prefer, drop it again from
your queue for now, as it is better for you.
Thomas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists