Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 26 Dec 2016 15:14:22 +0000 | From | Al Viro <> | Subject | Re: Linux 4.10-rc1 |
| |
On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 02:23:43PM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 05:45:10PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote: > > On 2016/12/26 17:18, Al Viro wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 26, 2016 at 05:05:37PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote: > > >> It looks like we need revert the changes from assembly files. > > > > I tested Kefeng's patch and works. more comments below. > > > > > Better yet, split the damn thing in two and include the asm-only part. > > > > split will cause other places for building errors, because there is no > > > > -#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ > > Huh? It's included only from assembler files, so what would use the other > parts?
FWIW, my arguments for splitting it are * asm and non-asm parts have almost no overlap - only uaccess_{en,dis}able_not_uao (as asm macro and static inline resp.), but that's it. It's not as if there had been arseloads of constants shared between C and assembler, etc. * having no asm/uaccess.h includes left allows to consolidate stuff into linux/uaccess.h; sure, in this case the stuff getting moved there would be under ifndef anyway, but "no includes outside of linux/uaccess.h" is easier to verify than "no includes outside of linux/uaccess.h and arch/arm64/.../*.S"
I can live with reverting those several includes to asm/uaccess.h (all interesting stuff is under that ifndef), but I think splitting the asm part away would be cleaner.
PS: if that variant does cause any build errors, I would very much like to see .config. Hanjun, could you post one that is triggering those?
| |