[PATCH] uapi: update install list after nvme.h rename

[PATCH] uapi: update install list after nvme.h rename

[Mike Frysinger]

Commit 9d99a8dda154 ("nvme: move hardware structures out of the uapi
version of nvme.h") renamed nvme.h to nvme_ioctl.h, but the uapi list
still refers to nvme.h.  People trying to install the headers hit a
failure as the header no longer exists.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
---
 include/uapi/linux/Kbuild | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/Kbuild b/include/uapi/linux/Kbuild
index dc6172c..7bb6aeb 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/Kbuild
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/Kbuild
@@ -307,7 +307,7 @@ header-y += nfs_mount.h
 header-y += nl80211.h
 header-y += n_r3964.h
 header-y += nubus.h
-header-y += nvme.h
+header-y += nvme_ioctl.h
 header-y += nvram.h
 header-y += omap3isp.h
 header-y += omapfb.h
-- 
2.6.2

Re: [PATCH] uapi: update install list after nvme.h rename

[Jiri Slaby]

On 01/11/2016, 02:14 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> Commit 9d99a8dda154 ("nvme: move hardware structures out of the uapi
> version of nvme.h") renamed nvme.h to nvme_ioctl.h, but the uapi list
> still refers to nvme.h.  People trying to install the headers hit a
> failure as the header no longer exists.

Wouldn't reverting the rename be nicer to userspace? So that the
filename is preserved and anybody who #included nvme.h still can do so?

> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
> ---
>  include/uapi/linux/Kbuild | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/Kbuild b/include/uapi/linux/Kbuild
> index dc6172c..7bb6aeb 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/Kbuild
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/Kbuild
> @@ -307,7 +307,7 @@ header-y += nfs_mount.h
>  header-y += nl80211.h
>  header-y += n_r3964.h
>  header-y += nubus.h
> -header-y += nvme.h
> +header-y += nvme_ioctl.h
>  header-y += nvram.h
>  header-y += omap3isp.h
>  header-y += omapfb.h
> 


-- 
js
suse labs

Re: [PATCH] uapi: update install list after nvme.h rename

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 08:14:11PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> Commit 9d99a8dda154 ("nvme: move hardware structures out of the uapi
> version of nvme.h") renamed nvme.h to nvme_ioctl.h, but the uapi list
> still refers to nvme.h.  People trying to install the headers hit a
> failure as the header no longer exists.

I'm pretty sure I acked this when someone (usually Geert picks this up)
sent it earlier.  But it still looks fine:

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>

Re: [PATCH] uapi: update install list after nvme.h rename

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 704 bytes --]

On 12 Jan 2016 09:45, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 01/11/2016, 02:14 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > Commit 9d99a8dda154 ("nvme: move hardware structures out of the uapi
> > version of nvme.h") renamed nvme.h to nvme_ioctl.h, but the uapi list
> > still refers to nvme.h.  People trying to install the headers hit a
> > failure as the header no longer exists.
> 
> Wouldn't reverting the rename be nicer to userspace? So that the
> filename is preserved and anybody who #included nvme.h still can do so?

i have no opinion on either route

on a related note, shouldn't headers install be part of the automatic
kernel checks that are run against repos on kernel.org ?  who runs that
thing ?
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] uapi: update install list after nvme.h rename

[Jiri Slaby]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 01/14/2016, 02:17 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 12 Jan 2016 09:45, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>> On 01/11/2016, 02:14 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> Commit 9d99a8dda154 ("nvme: move hardware structures out of the
>>> uapi version of nvme.h") renamed nvme.h to nvme_ioctl.h, but
>>> the uapi list still refers to nvme.h.  People trying to install
>>> the headers hit a failure as the header no longer exists.
>> 
>> Wouldn't reverting the rename be nicer to userspace? So that the 
>> filename is preserved and anybody who #included nvme.h still can
>> do so?
> 
> i have no opinion on either route
> 
> on a related note, shouldn't headers install be part of the
> automatic kernel checks that are run against repos on kernel.org ?
> who runs that thing ?

I have been thinking about at least 'test -f' for all 'headers-y'
during make all. What do you think, Michal?

thanks,
- -- 
js
suse labs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=tIm3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [PATCH] uapi: update install list after nvme.h rename

[Jiri Slaby]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 01/14/2016, 09:26 AM, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 01/14/2016, 02:17 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On 12 Jan 2016 09:45, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>>> On 01/11/2016, 02:14 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>>> Commit 9d99a8dda154 ("nvme: move hardware structures out of
>>>> the uapi version of nvme.h") renamed nvme.h to nvme_ioctl.h,
>>>> but the uapi list still refers to nvme.h.  People trying to
>>>> install the headers hit a failure as the header no longer
>>>> exists.
>>> 
>>> Wouldn't reverting the rename be nicer to userspace? So that
>>> the filename is preserved and anybody who #included nvme.h
>>> still can do so?
> 
>> i have no opinion on either route
> 
>> on a related note, shouldn't headers install be part of the 
>> automatic kernel checks that are run against repos on kernel.org
>> ? who runs that thing ?

^^^^^

You have Fengguang's 0-day build robot on your mind? (CCed)

> I have been thinking about at least 'test -f' for all 'headers-y' 
> during make all. What do you think, Michal?


- -- 
js
suse labs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=8T96
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: Re: [PATCH] uapi: update install list after nvme.h rename

[Mario Limonciello]

On 01/14/2016 02:26 AM, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 01/14/2016, 02:17 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On 12 Jan 2016 09:45, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> >> On 01/11/2016, 02:14 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >>> Commit 9d99a8dda154 ("nvme: move hardware structures out of the
> >>> uapi version of nvme.h") renamed nvme.h to nvme_ioctl.h, but
> >>> the uapi list still refers to nvme.h.  People trying to install
> >>> the headers hit a failure as the header no longer exists.
> >>
> >> Wouldn't reverting the rename be nicer to userspace? So that the
> >> filename is preserved and anybody who #included nvme.h still can
> >> do so?
>
> > i have no opinion on either route
>
Can someone with authority please decide on what to do about this? 
It's wrecking havoc in userspace right now on stuff that needs nvme.h.

We can't build efivar in Debian unstable or Ubuntu xenial anymore. 
efivar used to build against kernels older than 4.4.0 no problem, then
this happened and because nvme_ioctl.h isn't installed properly you
can't even fix it by #include nvme_ioctl.h.
Consequently it's impossible to fix unless you do something ugly like
define the macro you need from nvme_ioctl.h in your source.

Fedora has pulled this patch in already in advance of it hitting -stable
so that they could build efivar and similar apps with a fix like this:
https://github.com/rhinstaller/efivar/commit/3a0ae7189fe96355d64dc2daf91cf85282773c66

The whole point of -stable is to avoid distros needing to pull stuff in
that really should benefit everyone..

So please:
* Either pull this commit into stable so that the correct headers are
installed at kernel build.
Or
* Revert the old commit (9d99a8dda154) in 4.4 stable so things can build
again.

> > on a related note, shouldn't headers install be part of the
> > automatic kernel checks that are run against repos on kernel.org ?
> > who runs that thing ?
>
> I have been thinking about at least 'test -f' for all 'headers-y'
> during make all. What do you think, Michal?
>
> thanks,
> > >

Re: [PATCH] uapi: update install list after nvme.h rename

[Jens Axboe]

On 02/19/2016 03:23 PM, Mario Limonciello wrote:
>
>
> On 01/14/2016 02:26 AM, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>> On 01/14/2016, 02:17 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> On 12 Jan 2016 09:45, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>>>> On 01/11/2016, 02:14 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>>>> Commit 9d99a8dda154 ("nvme: move hardware structures out of the
>>>>> uapi version of nvme.h") renamed nvme.h to nvme_ioctl.h, but
>>>>> the uapi list still refers to nvme.h.  People trying to install
>>>>> the headers hit a failure as the header no longer exists.
>>>>
>>>> Wouldn't reverting the rename be nicer to userspace? So that the
>>>> filename is preserved and anybody who #included nvme.h still can
>>>> do so?
>>
>>> i have no opinion on either route
>>
> Can someone with authority please decide on what to do about this?
> It's wrecking havoc in userspace right now on stuff that needs nvme.h.

The patch is in Linus' tree, and it was marked stable as well. So stable 
will pick it up, when the next 4.4-stable is spun.

-- 
Jens Axboe