Hi Antonio, On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 03:30:53PM +0100, Antonio Quartulli wrote: > Hi Markus, > > first of all you should know that I really appreciate your hard work. > Thank you very much for this! > > On 26/12/14 12:41, Markus Pargmann wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Markus Pargmann > > --- > > packet.h | 5 +++++ > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/packet.h b/packet.h > > index facd1feddd4e..5fd0d814b6de 100644 > > --- a/packet.h > > +++ b/packet.h > > @@ -18,6 +18,11 @@ > > #ifndef _NET_BATMAN_ADV_PACKET_H_ > > #define _NET_BATMAN_ADV_PACKET_H_ > > > > +#ifdef __KERNEL__ > > +#include > > +#include > > +#endif /* __KERNEL__ */ > > Unfortunately we can't do this :-( > > Patches sent to the kernel cannot contain conditional code on being in > the kernel or not (same is true for checks against a particular kernel > version - such code can't be in the kernel). > > Patches sent to the kernel must assume that they are only for the kernel > (and for that particular version we are sending the patches against). Oh, I checked by grepping through the kernel before changing the patch like this. git grep "^#if.*def.*__KERNEL__" | grep -v include | wc -l 145 So there are 145 uses of an ifdef __KERNEL__ outside of include directories (I excluded include directories as they may be exported to userspace). So I thought it would be ok. > Of course this makes everything a bit trickier for us since we share > files between kernel and userspace ..... > > This is one of the reasons why we have compat.c/h in the batman-adv > package: you will see that in those files we had to implement all sort > of hackish/dirty tricks in order to keep the code in the other files > clean (compat.h/c are not sent to the kernel but are part of the > batman-adv out-of-the-tree package). Yes I saw that. I still don't really understand why this whole out of tree package is necessary. But I am wondering if it wouldn't be easier to develope and build directly in the kernel tree. > > However, as far as I know, you should be able to simply do: > > #include (without the uapi subfolder) > > and this should happily work for both the kernel and the userspace. Have > you tried that? I might be wrong - it's quite some time I haven't used > uapi headers. Yep, that works for the kernel, thanks. However, bitops.h remains as we don't have bitops.h for the userspace. > Otherwise we might need to find a different solution - or live we what > we have now :) Yeah it works normally as the includes leak through other include files. But I prefer explicit includes. I am thinking about some solution for the bitops.h Best Regards, Markus -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |