Re: [PATCH v5 02/24] x86/elf, um/x86/elf: Move relocation constants to UAPI

[Borislav Petkov]

On Wed, Sep 09, 2026 at 07:59:51AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> These names and numbers are defined by the architectures' ELF specifications.
> They are already cast in stone. For example see Table 4.9 of [0].
> Changing them would break compilers, linkers, loaders and more or less every
> existing ELF binary.

So?

Your goal is to provide them to tools/. You want to provide them to
*everything*. See the discrepance here?

> That is the documentation for the tools UAPI headers.

Did you even read that file?

"Why we want a copy of kernel headers in tools?
==============================================

There used to be no copies, with tools/ code using kernel headers
directly. From time to time tools/perf/ broke due to legitimate kernel
hacking. At some point Linus complained about such direct usage. Then we
adopted the current model.

The way these headers are used in perf are not restricted to just
including them to compile something.
..."

Just read the damn thing before you reply.

> Also we already have other, closely related, ELF constants in the UAPI,
> see {,tools/}include/uapi/linux/elf{,-em}.h.

Srsly?!?

You moved them there:

commit 626fd35278295fbb21f2da331cd8028e9738d965
Author: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:   Wed Feb 26 12:44:46 2025 +0100

    tools/include: Add uapi/linux/elf.h
    
    It will be used by the vDSO selftests.


Looking at the rest, it looks like some elf bits got exported, you added some
more and that ship has sailed. I still think us providing headers is
completely unnecessary and it will come to cause conflicts eventually but hey,
not my problem.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette