Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 19 Feb 2014 20:16:02 +0900 | From | AKASHI Takahiro <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: is_compat_task is defined both in asm/compat.h and linux/compat.h |
| |
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@linaro.org> >> --- >> 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 >
| |