Re: [PATCH 1/3] tools include: Add uapi mman.h for each architecture

[Naveen N. Rao]

On 2016/09/14 05:36PM, Wang Nan wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2016/9/14 17:28, Naveen N. Rao wrote:
> > On 2016/09/12 06:15PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > Em Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 04:07:42PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > > > Em Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 12:54:29PM +0000, Wang Nan escreveu:
> > > > > Some mmap related macros have different values for different
> > > > > architectures. This patch introduces uapi mman.h for each
> > > > > architectures.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Three headers are cloned from kernel include to tools/include:
> > > > > 
> > > > >   tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/mman-common.h
> > > > >   tools/include/uapi/asm-generic/mman.h
> > > > >   tools/include/uapi/linux/mman.h
> > > > Cool, the above was done as copies, why not the rest? IIRC you mentioned
> > > > some reasoning behind that decision, but we need it spelled out here.
> > > > 
> > > > For instance, I went on and look at arch/xtensa/include/uapi/asm/mman.h,
> > > > and couldn't find why we shouldn't copy it just like the three files
> > > > above.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm looking now at why the build breaks in so many systems, first hunch
> > > > is that bits/ part (the ones without the failure details probably have
> > > > the same errors), alpine uses musl libc, but some that broke are glibc
> > > > based.
> > > So, please take a look at my perf/core branch, I applied 1/3 and 3/3,
> > > but took a different path for 2/3, now it builds for all systems I have
> > > containers for:
> > This still fails for me on ppc64. Perhaps we should guard
> > P_MMAP_FLAG(32BIT) and potentially others with a #ifdef, which was
> > earlier reverted by commit 256763b0 ("perf trace beauty mmap: Add more
> > conditional defines")?
> 
> Perhaps we should set all non-exist flag to 0 in each uapi mman.h?

Will that work for MADV_* since the macro there is for a case statement?

- Naveen