Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: is_compat_task is defined both in asm/compat.h and linux/compat.h

[AKASHI Takahiro]

On 02/18/2014 04:32 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 10:11:32AM +0000, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > kernel/seccomp.c includes linux/compat.h and, indicrectly, asm/compat.h
> > via asm/syscall.h. Due to the duplicated definition of is_compat_task,
> > compiling this file will fail in the case of !CONFIG_COMPAT.
> > This patch makes the definition in asm/compat.h valid only if necessary.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   arch/arm64/include/asm/compat.h |    2 ++
> >   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/compat.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/compat.h
> > index fda2704..72f3b18 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/compat.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/compat.h
> > @@ -305,10 +305,12 @@ static inline int is_compat_thread(struct thread_info *thread)
> >
> >   #else /* !CONFIG_COMPAT */
> >
> > +#ifndef is_compat_task /* it's there in linux/compat.h */
> >   static inline int is_compat_task(void)
> >   {
> >   	return 0;
> >   }
> > +#endif
>
> This is horrible! Can we instead include linux/compat.h where we need this
> macro and then remove this definition?

It's fine with me, but asm/compat.h is also included in
  hw_breakpoint.c, process.c, ptrace.c and signal.c.

After replacing asm/compat.h to linux/compat.h in these files, I could successfully built
the kernel, but I can't guarantee that the kernel works without any problem :-)

Anyway I will go forward with this change.

-Takahiro AKASHI

> Will
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/