Re: [GIT PULL] kbuild changes for v4.9-rc1

[Michal Marek]

On 2016-10-18 03:34, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> Hi Adam,
> 
> Thanks, this is looking good. powerpc will be able to use the generic
> header.
> 
> On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 02:16:26 +0200
> Adam Borowski <kilobyte@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 02:22:34PM +0200, Mathieu OTHACEHE wrote:
>>>> +#include <asm/uaccess.h>
>>>> +#include <asm/uaccess.h>  
>>>
>>> Included twice.  
>>
>> D'oh!
>>
>>>> +#include <asm/string.h>
>>>> +#include <asm/page.h>
>>>> +#include <asm/checksum.h>
>>>> +
>>>> +#include <asm-generic/asm-prototypes.h>
>>>> +
>>>> +#include <asm/page.h>
>>>> +#include <asm/pgtable.h>
>>>> +#include <asm/special_insns.h>
>>>> +#include <asm/preempt.h>  
>>>
>>> No <asm/arch_hweight.h> for __sw_hweight32 and __sw_hweight64 ?   
>>
>> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/asm-prototypes.h b/include/asm-generic/asm-prototypes.h
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..df13637
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/include/asm-generic/asm-prototypes.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
>> +#include <linux/bitops.h>
>>
>> ... which has these.
>>
>> Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> } bitops.h is wrong header as well.
>> } Why do you need bitops for bunch of function prototypes?
>>
>> Unless you guys prefer using low-level headers only, that is.
> 
> Well you can't use asm/arch_hweight.h in a generic header of course.
> I would suggest just including linux/ variants where practical for
> the asm-generic/asm-prototypes.h header.
> 
> We should probably just bring all these arch patches through the
> kbuild tree.

Adam,

are you submitting a new version of your x86 asm-prototypes.h patch?

Thanks,
Michal