Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 00:53:25 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Valdis Kletnieks <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>, Jessica Yu <jeyu@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Patch to include/linux/kernel.h breaks 3rd party modules.
Message-ID: <20161222005325.GD1555@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <30992.1482352925@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <30992.1482352925@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1938
Lines: 50

On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 03:42:05PM -0500, Valdis Kletnieks wrote:
> Yes, I know that usually out-of-tree modules are on their own.
> However, this one may require a rethink..
> 
> (Sorry for not catching this sooner, I hadn't tried to deal with the
> affected module since this patch hit linux-next in next-20161128)
> 
> commit 7fd8329ba502ef76dd91db561c7aed696b2c7720
> Author: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
> Date:   Wed Sep 21 13:47:22 2016 +0200
> 
>     taint/module: Clean up global and module taint flags handling
> 
> Contains this chunk:
> 
> --- a/include/linux/kernel.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kernel.h
> @@ -506,6 +506,15 @@ extern enum system_states {
>  #define TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE          13
>  #define TAINT_SOFTLOCKUP               14
>  #define TAINT_LIVEPATCH                        15
> +#define TAINT_FLAGS_COUNT              16
> +
> +struct taint_flag {
> +       char true;      /* character printed when tainted */
> +       char false;     /* character printed when not tainted */
> +       bool module;    /* also show as a per-module taint flag */
> +};
> 
> and hilarity ensues when an out-of-tree module has this:
> 
> # ifndef true
> #  define true  (1)
> # endif
> # ifndef false
> #  define false (0)
> # endif
> 
> My proposed fix: change true/false to tainted/untainted.  If this
> is agreeable, I'll code and submit the fix.

That certainly makes sense, but this kind of macros really ought to be
killed off.  In-tree there are only two such places - arch/powerpc/boot/types.h
(no idea what's the environment there, but seeing that it starts with
#include <stdbool.h>...) and fs/cifs/smbencrypt.c.

BTW, looking at arch/powerpc/boot/types.h...  How does it manage to survive,
anyway?  gcc stdbool.h has #define bool _Bool, so that typedef int bool; in
there would turn into typedef int _Bool, which should *not* be accepted by
any C compiler.  Or does it define __stdcplusplus somehow?  Confused...