Re: [PATCH] warning: `__attribute_used__' redefined

[Linus Torvalds]

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> 
> This is what Debian has been using.  I believe the other folks with a
> glibc-kernel-headers package based on 2.6 do something similar.  I
> don't know how you'll feel about adding this sort of crap to the
> kernel, though.  Someone else needs to find time to start linuxabi
> moving again...

I don't mind adding a few __KERNEL__ checks, but no I don't want code like 
this:

> +#if !defined(__KERNEL__)
> +/* Debian: Most of these are inappropriate for userspace.  */
> +/* We don't define likely, unlikely, or barrier; they're namespace-intrusive
> +   and should not be needed outside of __KERNEL__.  For __attribute_pure__
> +   and __attribute_used__ we use glibc's definitions.  */
> +# include <sys/cdefs.h>
> +# define __deprecated
> +#else

that is completely glibc-dependent and has no meaning in a kernel header 
file.

In general, anything that uses most of the kernel special magic defines
(__deprecated, __inline__, etc) probably should be inside #ifdef
__KERNEL__ anyway, so the kernel <linux/compiler.h> file should not need 
to define them. 

There are a few cases that look special, just because they touch data
structures that are actually visible to user space. That would be things
like "__packed__" and "__user" etc, which are used to tell something about 
the data structure.

So right now I just added a "#ifdef __KERNEL__" around the special parts, 
and did _not_ do the part about. We can add a few more #ifdef's around 
something else that breaks, but in general I feel that this is up to 
whoever merges the headers into user space.

		Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/