[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <72a2744a-debc-4d8f-b418-5d6a595c2578@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2026 13:45:04 +0100
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@...utronix.de>,
"David Laight" <david.laight.linux@...il.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Andreas Larsson" <andreas@...sler.com>, "Andy Lutomirski" <luto@...nel.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...nel.org>, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Borislav Petkov" <bp@...en8.de>,
"Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, "Heiko Carstens" <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Vasily Gorbik" <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Alexander Gordeev" <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Christian Borntraeger" <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Sven Schnelle" <svens@...ux.ibm.com>, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] asm-generic/bitsperlong.h: Add sanity checks for
__BITS_PER_LONG
On Mon, Jan 19, 2026, at 11:56, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 10:37:58AM +0000, David Laight wrote:
>>
>> Don't you need a check that it isn't wrong on a user system?
>> Which is what I thought it was doing.
>
> Not really. The overrides defined by arch/*/include/uapi/asm/bitsperlong.h are
> being tested here. If they work in the kernel build I assume they also work
> in userspace.
I think You could just move check into include/asm-generic/bitsperlong.h
to make this more obvious with the #ifdef __KERNEL__, and remove the
disabled check from my original version there.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists