From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6193CC433EF for ; Wed, 12 Jan 2022 16:09:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239649AbiALQJk (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Jan 2022 11:09:40 -0500 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:46710 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1354957AbiALQJk (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Jan 2022 11:09:40 -0500 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 3EE0868AFE; Wed, 12 Jan 2022 17:09:36 +0100 (CET) Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2022 17:09:35 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Jeff Layton , Christoph Hellwig , Guo Ren , the arch/x86 maintainers , Linux ARM , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "open list:BROADCOM NVRAM DRIVER" , Parisc List , linuxppc-dev , linux-s390 , sparclinux , linux-arch , "J. Bruce Fields" Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] uapi: always define F_GETLK64/F_SETLK64/F_SETLKW64 in fcntl.h Message-ID: <20220112160935.GA3684@lst.de> References: <20220111083515.502308-1-hch@lst.de> <20220111083515.502308-5-hch@lst.de> <20220112075609.GA4854@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-mips@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 01:08:24PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > I don't have a strong opinion here. If we were taking symbols away that > > were previously visible to userland it would be one thing, but since > > we're just adding symbols that may not have been there before, this > > seems less likely to break anything. > > Changing > > #ifndef CONFIG_64BIT > > to > > #if __BITS_PER_LONG==32 || defined(__KERNEL__), > > would take symbols away, since the CONFIG_64BIT macro is never > set in user space. Yes. > > I probably lean toward Christoph's original solution instead of keeping > > the conditional definitions. It's hard to imagine there are many > > programs that care whether these other symbols are defined or not. > > > > You can add this to the original patch: > > > > Acked-by: Jeff Layton > > Sounds good, thanks So should we go ahead with the series as-is? Or respin it? Or add the above change ontop?