Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753662AbaFHRTL (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jun 2014 13:19:11 -0400 Received: from asavdk4.altibox.net ([109.247.116.15]:55586 "EHLO asavdk4.altibox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753518AbaFHRTK (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jun 2014 13:19:10 -0400 Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2014 19:18:48 +0200 From: Sam Ravnborg To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , gorcunov@openvz.org, hpa@zytor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, luto@amacapital.net, mingo@kernel.org, sasha.levin@oracle.com, stefani@seibold.net, tglx@linutronix.de, xemul@parallels.com, kbuild@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] x86/vdso changes for v3.16 Message-ID: <20140608171848.GA19777@ravnborg.org> References: <201406042235.s54MZgwP020553@terminus.zytor.com> <20140606140017.afb7f91142f66cb3dd13c186@linux-foundation.org> <53922D7F.8090601@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53922D7F.8090601@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 06, 2014 at 02:07:11PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 06/06/2014 02:00 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Wed, 4 Jun 2014 15:35:42 -0700 "H. Peter Anvin" wrote: > > > >> Vdso cleanups and improvements largely from Andy Lutomirski. > > > > arch/x86/vdso/vdso2c.h: In function 'go64': > > arch/x86/vdso/vdso2c.h:21: warning: implicit declaration of function 'le64toh' > > arch/x86/vdso/vdso2c.h:21: warning: implicit declaration of function 'le32toh' > > arch/x86/vdso/vdso2c.h:21: warning: implicit declaration of function 'le16toh' > > arch/x86/vdso/vdso2c.h:119: warning: implicit declaration of function 'htole16' > > > > My Fedora Core 6 (lol gotcha) test box doesn't have these. > > > > http://www.unix.com/man-page/linux/3/le64toh/ has some details. I > > don't appear to have letoh64 and friends either. > > > > OK... so now we have a tools baseline problem. It isn't that we > couldn't open-code these functions, but of course we'd also like to not > *have* to do so... but also we don't want to have the kernel build rely > on autoconf ;) > > So we have a few options, here: > > 1. We could use the unaligned macros defined in > tools/include/tools/*_byteshift.h. > > 2. Open-code it. > > 3. Define a baseline which includes these kinds of functions. > > I guess I would be leaning toward #1, but would also wonder if that also > means we should add -I$(srctree)/tools/include to the global settings > ... we are *already* adding it to HOSTCFLAGS_sortextable.o. I would say that tools/include/tools/* should be considered the baseline for programs running on the host. So therefore unconditionally adding -I$(srctree)/tools/include should then be OK. Sam -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/