[PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Sam Protsenko]

The kernel is self-contained project and can be built with bare-metal
toolchain. But bare-metal toolchain doesn't define __linux__. Because of
this u_quad_t type is not defined when using bare-metal toolchain and
codafs build fails. This patch fixes it by defining u_quad_t type
unconditionally.

Cc: Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
---
 include/linux/coda.h | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/coda.h b/include/linux/coda.h
index d30209b9cef8..0ca0c83fdb1c 100644
--- a/include/linux/coda.h
+++ b/include/linux/coda.h
@@ -58,8 +58,7 @@ Mellon the rights to redistribute these changes without encumbrance.
 #ifndef _CODA_HEADER_
 #define _CODA_HEADER_
 
-#if defined(__linux__)
 typedef unsigned long long u_quad_t;
-#endif
+
 #include <uapi/linux/coda.h>
 #endif 
-- 
2.19.1

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Sam Protsenko]

On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 10:27 PM Sam Protsenko
<semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> The kernel is self-contained project and can be built with bare-metal
> toolchain. But bare-metal toolchain doesn't define __linux__. Because of
> this u_quad_t type is not defined when using bare-metal toolchain and
> codafs build fails. This patch fixes it by defining u_quad_t type
> unconditionally.
>
> Cc: Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu>
> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
> Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
> ---
>  include/linux/coda.h | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/coda.h b/include/linux/coda.h
> index d30209b9cef8..0ca0c83fdb1c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/coda.h
> +++ b/include/linux/coda.h
> @@ -58,8 +58,7 @@ Mellon the rights to redistribute these changes without encumbrance.
>  #ifndef _CODA_HEADER_
>  #define _CODA_HEADER_
>
> -#if defined(__linux__)
>  typedef unsigned long long u_quad_t;
> -#endif
> +
>  #include <uapi/linux/coda.h>
>  #endif
> --
> 2.19.1
>

+ Jan Harkes, + Ruslan Bilovol

Hi Jan,

Can you please apply this? Nobody seems to be interested in taking
this patch, so I'm not sure how to proceed further. Please advice.

Thanks!

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 6:31 PM Sam Protsenko
<semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 10:27 PM Sam Protsenko
> <semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > The kernel is self-contained project and can be built with bare-metal
> > toolchain. But bare-metal toolchain doesn't define __linux__. Because of
> > this u_quad_t type is not defined when using bare-metal toolchain and
> > codafs build fails. This patch fixes it by defining u_quad_t type
> > unconditionally.
> >
> > Cc: Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu>
> > Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
> > Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>

I'm not sure how you managed to miss people in this list (perhaps by
default you have suppress all Cc in your Git configuration), but I
guess we may gently ask Christoph to apply this in case Jan will not
appear.

> > Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/coda.h | 3 +--
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/coda.h b/include/linux/coda.h
> > index d30209b9cef8..0ca0c83fdb1c 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/coda.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/coda.h
> > @@ -58,8 +58,7 @@ Mellon the rights to redistribute these changes without encumbrance.
> >  #ifndef _CODA_HEADER_
> >  #define _CODA_HEADER_
> >
> > -#if defined(__linux__)
> >  typedef unsigned long long u_quad_t;
> > -#endif
> > +
> >  #include <uapi/linux/coda.h>
> >  #endif
> > --
> > 2.19.1
> >
>
> + Jan Harkes, + Ruslan Bilovol
>
> Hi Jan,
>
> Can you please apply this? Nobody seems to be interested in taking
> this patch, so I'm not sure how to proceed further. Please advice.
>
> Thanks!



-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 06:41:13PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> I'm not sure how you managed to miss people in this list (perhaps by
> default you have suppress all Cc in your Git configuration), but I
> guess we may gently ask Christoph to apply this in case Jan will not
> appear.

I don't really have a relevant tree.  You probably want to send it
to Al Viro.

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Jan Harkes]

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 06:41:13PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> I'm not sure how you managed to miss people in this list (perhaps by
> default you have suppress all Cc in your Git configuration), but I
> guess we may gently ask Christoph to apply this in case Jan will not
> appear.

You have got to give me a little more than 10 minutes to respond before
assuming that I would not appear... I don't think I've ignored any
previous emails on this subject and the only issues has been some people
not receiving my responses for unknown reasons (agressive spam filter?).

I have no problem with this patch, have it sitting with some other
non-urgent patches and in case it doesn't appear upstream it should
piggyback with whatever I have to send.

I still don't know why the bare-metal toolchain couldn't just add a
-D__linux__.  I understand that this define is expected to be always
present while compiling kernel headers so that there is no good reason
to even bother testing for it, which is why I have no issue with the
patch. But it seems it would make your life a lot easier if you had it
defined.

Jan

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Sam Protsenko]

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 8:10 PM Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 06:41:13PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > I'm not sure how you managed to miss people in this list (perhaps by
> > default you have suppress all Cc in your Git configuration), but I
> > guess we may gently ask Christoph to apply this in case Jan will not
> > appear.
>
> You have got to give me a little more than 10 minutes to respond before
> assuming that I would not appear... I don't think I've ignored any
> previous emails on this subject and the only issues has been some people
> not receiving my responses for unknown reasons (agressive spam filter?).
>
> I have no problem with this patch, have it sitting with some other
> non-urgent patches and in case it doesn't appear upstream it should
> piggyback with whatever I have to send.
>

Thanks, Jan, really appreciate it. We need this patch to fix our tests
with allmodconfig configuration (in Linaro CI loops).

> I still don't know why the bare-metal toolchain couldn't just add a
> -D__linux__.  I understand that this define is expected to be always
> present while compiling kernel headers so that there is no good reason
> to even bother testing for it, which is why I have no issue with the
> patch. But it seems it would make your life a lot easier if you had it
> defined.
>

As I understand it, from toolchain's point of view, if __linux__ is
defined then it means that the program is being built *for* Linux
(i.e. we can use Linux specific features, ABI, like syscalls).
Checking this definition can make sense in uapi headers, but in kernel
code we shouldn't use it (as kernel is baremetal program and not
compiled for some OS). I presume that's why __linux__ is not defined
in bare-metal toolchains (as those don't provide Linux specific
features, libc, etc).

> Jan
>

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Sam Protsenko]

+ Jan Harkes back to "To:" list, slipped away somehow...

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 9:36 PM Sam Protsenko
<semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 8:10 PM Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 06:41:13PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > I'm not sure how you managed to miss people in this list (perhaps by
> > > default you have suppress all Cc in your Git configuration), but I
> > > guess we may gently ask Christoph to apply this in case Jan will not
> > > appear.
> >
> > You have got to give me a little more than 10 minutes to respond before
> > assuming that I would not appear... I don't think I've ignored any
> > previous emails on this subject and the only issues has been some people
> > not receiving my responses for unknown reasons (agressive spam filter?).
> >
> > I have no problem with this patch, have it sitting with some other
> > non-urgent patches and in case it doesn't appear upstream it should
> > piggyback with whatever I have to send.
> >
>
> Thanks, Jan, really appreciate it. We need this patch to fix our tests
> with allmodconfig configuration (in Linaro CI loops).
>
> > I still don't know why the bare-metal toolchain couldn't just add a
> > -D__linux__.  I understand that this define is expected to be always
> > present while compiling kernel headers so that there is no good reason
> > to even bother testing for it, which is why I have no issue with the
> > patch. But it seems it would make your life a lot easier if you had it
> > defined.
> >
>
> As I understand it, from toolchain's point of view, if __linux__ is
> defined then it means that the program is being built *for* Linux
> (i.e. we can use Linux specific features, ABI, like syscalls).
> Checking this definition can make sense in uapi headers, but in kernel
> code we shouldn't use it (as kernel is baremetal program and not
> compiled for some OS). I presume that's why __linux__ is not defined
> in bare-metal toolchains (as those don't provide Linux specific
> features, libc, etc).
>
> > Jan
> >

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Jan Harkes]

That actually makes a lot of sense.

Jan

On November 21, 2018 2:39:03 PM EST, Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
>+ Jan Harkes back to "To:" list, slipped away somehow...
>
>On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 9:36 PM Sam Protsenko
><semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 8:10 PM Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu>
>wrote:
>> >
>> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 06:41:13PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> > > I'm not sure how you managed to miss people in this list (perhaps
>by
>> > > default you have suppress all Cc in your Git configuration), but
>I
>> > > guess we may gently ask Christoph to apply this in case Jan will
>not
>> > > appear.
>> >
>> > You have got to give me a little more than 10 minutes to respond
>before
>> > assuming that I would not appear... I don't think I've ignored any
>> > previous emails on this subject and the only issues has been some
>people
>> > not receiving my responses for unknown reasons (agressive spam
>filter?).
>> >
>> > I have no problem with this patch, have it sitting with some other
>> > non-urgent patches and in case it doesn't appear upstream it should
>> > piggyback with whatever I have to send.
>> >
>>
>> Thanks, Jan, really appreciate it. We need this patch to fix our
>tests
>> with allmodconfig configuration (in Linaro CI loops).
>>
>> > I still don't know why the bare-metal toolchain couldn't just add a
>> > -D__linux__.  I understand that this define is expected to be
>always
>> > present while compiling kernel headers so that there is no good
>reason
>> > to even bother testing for it, which is why I have no issue with
>the
>> > patch. But it seems it would make your life a lot easier if you had
>it
>> > defined.
>> >
>>
>> As I understand it, from toolchain's point of view, if __linux__ is
>> defined then it means that the program is being built *for* Linux
>> (i.e. we can use Linux specific features, ABI, like syscalls).
>> Checking this definition can make sense in uapi headers, but in
>kernel
>> code we shouldn't use it (as kernel is baremetal program and not
>> compiled for some OS). I presume that's why __linux__ is not defined
>> in bare-metal toolchains (as those don't provide Linux specific
>> features, libc, etc).
>>
>> > Jan
>> >

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Sam Protsenko]

Hi Jan,

Can you please clarify on this patch? As I can see v5.0-rc1 is out
now, which means merge window is closed, but I can't see this patch in
linux-mainline yet. Do you need any additional steps from my side
(like rebasing, etc)?

Thanks!

On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 12:49 AM Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
>
> That actually makes a lot of sense.
>
> Jan
>
> On November 21, 2018 2:39:03 PM EST, Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
> >+ Jan Harkes back to "To:" list, slipped away somehow...
> >
> >On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 9:36 PM Sam Protsenko
> ><semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 8:10 PM Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu>
> >wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 06:41:13PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >> > > I'm not sure how you managed to miss people in this list (perhaps
> >by
> >> > > default you have suppress all Cc in your Git configuration), but
> >I
> >> > > guess we may gently ask Christoph to apply this in case Jan will
> >not
> >> > > appear.
> >> >
> >> > You have got to give me a little more than 10 minutes to respond
> >before
> >> > assuming that I would not appear... I don't think I've ignored any
> >> > previous emails on this subject and the only issues has been some
> >people
> >> > not receiving my responses for unknown reasons (agressive spam
> >filter?).
> >> >
> >> > I have no problem with this patch, have it sitting with some other
> >> > non-urgent patches and in case it doesn't appear upstream it should
> >> > piggyback with whatever I have to send.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Thanks, Jan, really appreciate it. We need this patch to fix our
> >tests
> >> with allmodconfig configuration (in Linaro CI loops).
> >>
> >> > I still don't know why the bare-metal toolchain couldn't just add a
> >> > -D__linux__.  I understand that this define is expected to be
> >always
> >> > present while compiling kernel headers so that there is no good
> >reason
> >> > to even bother testing for it, which is why I have no issue with
> >the
> >> > patch. But it seems it would make your life a lot easier if you had
> >it
> >> > defined.
> >> >
> >>
> >> As I understand it, from toolchain's point of view, if __linux__ is
> >> defined then it means that the program is being built *for* Linux
> >> (i.e. we can use Linux specific features, ABI, like syscalls).
> >> Checking this definition can make sense in uapi headers, but in
> >kernel
> >> code we shouldn't use it (as kernel is baremetal program and not
> >> compiled for some OS). I presume that's why __linux__ is not defined
> >> in bare-metal toolchains (as those don't provide Linux specific
> >> features, libc, etc).
> >>
> >> > Jan
> >> >

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 8:10 PM Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 06:41:13PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > I'm not sure how you managed to miss people in this list (perhaps by
> > default you have suppress all Cc in your Git configuration), but I
> > guess we may gently ask Christoph to apply this in case Jan will not
> > appear.
>
> You have got to give me a little more than 10 minutes to respond before
> assuming that I would not appear...

Problem is, AFAICS, Sam's initial Cc list was not fulfilled. As I
guessed it might be configuration issue on his side.

> I don't think I've ignored any
> previous emails on this subject and the only issues has been some people
> not receiving my responses for unknown reasons (agressive spam filter?).

Personally I didn't get this one (Gmail "clever" spam filtering).

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

[PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Sam Protsenko]

The kernel is self-contained project and can be built with bare-metal
toolchain. But bare-metal toolchain doesn't define __linux__. Because of
this u_quad_t type is not defined when using bare-metal toolchain and
codafs build fails. This patch fixes it by defining u_quad_t type
unconditionally.

Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
---
 include/linux/coda.h | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/coda.h b/include/linux/coda.h
index d30209b9cef8..0ca0c83fdb1c 100644
--- a/include/linux/coda.h
+++ b/include/linux/coda.h
@@ -58,8 +58,7 @@ Mellon the rights to redistribute these changes without encumbrance.
 #ifndef _CODA_HEADER_
 #define _CODA_HEADER_
 
-#if defined(__linux__)
 typedef unsigned long long u_quad_t;
-#endif
+
 #include <uapi/linux/coda.h>
 #endif 
-- 
2.19.1

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Sam Protsenko]

Hi Greg,

On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Sam Protsenko
<semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
> The kernel is self-contained project and can be built with bare-metal
> toolchain. But bare-metal toolchain doesn't define __linux__. Because of
> this u_quad_t type is not defined when using bare-metal toolchain and
> codafs build fails. This patch fixes it by defining u_quad_t type
> unconditionally.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
> ---

Can you please pull this one, if this applicable? I sent it a while
ago, but I guess it got lost in mailing list. It might be also
applicable to stable branch (as it fixes allmodconfig build for ARM
with bare-metal toolchain).

Thanks!

>  include/linux/coda.h | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/coda.h b/include/linux/coda.h
> index d30209b9cef8..0ca0c83fdb1c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/coda.h
> +++ b/include/linux/coda.h
> @@ -58,8 +58,7 @@ Mellon the rights to redistribute these changes without encumbrance.
>  #ifndef _CODA_HEADER_
>  #define _CODA_HEADER_
>
> -#if defined(__linux__)
>  typedef unsigned long long u_quad_t;
> -#endif
> +
>  #include <uapi/linux/coda.h>
>  #endif
> --
> 2.19.1
>

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Andy Shevchenko]

Cc: Arnd, I guess it might be useful for kernel-ci activity as well.

On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:05 PM Sam Protsenko
<semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Sam Protsenko
> <semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
> > The kernel is self-contained project and can be built with bare-metal
> > toolchain. But bare-metal toolchain doesn't define __linux__. Because of
> > this u_quad_t type is not defined when using bare-metal toolchain and
> > codafs build fails. This patch fixes it by defining u_quad_t type
> > unconditionally.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
> > ---
>
> Can you please pull this one, if this applicable? I sent it a while
> ago, but I guess it got lost in mailing list. It might be also
> applicable to stable branch (as it fixes allmodconfig build for ARM
> with bare-metal toolchain).
>
> Thanks!
>
> >  include/linux/coda.h | 3 +--
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/coda.h b/include/linux/coda.h
> > index d30209b9cef8..0ca0c83fdb1c 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/coda.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/coda.h
> > @@ -58,8 +58,7 @@ Mellon the rights to redistribute these changes without encumbrance.
> >  #ifndef _CODA_HEADER_
> >  #define _CODA_HEADER_
> >
> > -#if defined(__linux__)
> >  typedef unsigned long long u_quad_t;
> > -#endif
> > +
> >  #include <uapi/linux/coda.h>
> >  #endif
> > --
> > 2.19.1
> >



-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Greg KH]

On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:05:49PM +0200, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Sam Protsenko
> <semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
> > The kernel is self-contained project and can be built with bare-metal
> > toolchain. But bare-metal toolchain doesn't define __linux__. Because of
> > this u_quad_t type is not defined when using bare-metal toolchain and
> > codafs build fails. This patch fixes it by defining u_quad_t type
> > unconditionally.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
> > ---
> 
> Can you please pull this one, if this applicable? I sent it a while
> ago, but I guess it got lost in mailing list. It might be also
> applicable to stable branch (as it fixes allmodconfig build for ARM
> with bare-metal toolchain).

Why are you asking me?  I'm not the maintainer of this file :(

confused,

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Sam Protsenko]

On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 8:34 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:05:49PM +0200, Sam Protsenko wrote:
>> Hi Greg,
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Sam Protsenko
>> <semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
>> > The kernel is self-contained project and can be built with bare-metal
>> > toolchain. But bare-metal toolchain doesn't define __linux__. Because of
>> > this u_quad_t type is not defined when using bare-metal toolchain and
>> > codafs build fails. This patch fixes it by defining u_quad_t type
>> > unconditionally.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
>> > ---
>>
>> Can you please pull this one, if this applicable? I sent it a while
>> ago, but I guess it got lost in mailing list. It might be also
>> applicable to stable branch (as it fixes allmodconfig build for ARM
>> with bare-metal toolchain).
>
> Why are you asking me?  I'm not the maintainer of this file :(
>
> confused,
>

Sorry to bother you. I just thought you might be interested in this
one, as it fixes build for "allmodconfig" configuration, hence it can
be related to stable branch. Also, maintainers didn't respond to that
patch, so I'm kinda dead in the water.

Anyway, will try to ping maintainers one more time.

> greg k-h

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Jan Harkes]

On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 02:01:04PM +0200, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 8:34 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:05:49PM +0200, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> >> Hi Greg,
> >>
> >> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Sam Protsenko
> >> <semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
> >> > The kernel is self-contained project and can be built with bare-metal
> >> > toolchain. But bare-metal toolchain doesn't define __linux__. Because of
> >> > this u_quad_t type is not defined when using bare-metal toolchain and
> >> > codafs build fails. This patch fixes it by defining u_quad_t type
> >> > unconditionally.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
> >> > ---
> >>
> >> Can you please pull this one, if this applicable? I sent it a while
> >> ago, but I guess it got lost in mailing list. It might be also
> >> applicable to stable branch (as it fixes allmodconfig build for ARM
> >> with bare-metal toolchain).
> >
> > Why are you asking me?  I'm not the maintainer of this file :(
> >
> > confused,
> >
> 
> Sorry to bother you. I just thought you might be interested in this
> one, as it fixes build for "allmodconfig" configuration, hence it can
> be related to stable branch. Also, maintainers didn't respond to that
> patch, so I'm kinda dead in the water.
> 
> Anyway, will try to ping maintainers one more time.

I thought I had responded, I didn't see a reason why one would want to
compile non-userspace kernel headers outside of the context of the
kernel and if you do have to do that why not just add -D__linux__.

However, I can also see the point that anything not in uapi/ pretty much
by definition will be compiled with __linux__ defined so it actually
doesn't make a discernable difference to just drop the ifdef and I'm
fine with a patch like this.

These trivial patches typically get picked up through kernel janitors,
or maybe an akpm linux-next patch queue. In fact, I'm not even sure if
there is a designated person I would be passing updates to, I've sent
patches to akpm, viro, hellwig, linus, and gregkh at various times.

Jan

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Sam Protsenko]

On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 3:04 PM, Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 02:01:04PM +0200, Sam Protsenko wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 8:34 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:05:49PM +0200, Sam Protsenko wrote:
>> >> Hi Greg,
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Sam Protsenko
>> >> <semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
>> >> > The kernel is self-contained project and can be built with bare-metal
>> >> > toolchain. But bare-metal toolchain doesn't define __linux__. Because of
>> >> > this u_quad_t type is not defined when using bare-metal toolchain and
>> >> > codafs build fails. This patch fixes it by defining u_quad_t type
>> >> > unconditionally.
>> >> >
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
>> >> > ---
>> >>
>> >> Can you please pull this one, if this applicable? I sent it a while
>> >> ago, but I guess it got lost in mailing list. It might be also
>> >> applicable to stable branch (as it fixes allmodconfig build for ARM
>> >> with bare-metal toolchain).
>> >
>> > Why are you asking me?  I'm not the maintainer of this file :(
>> >
>> > confused,
>> >
>>
>> Sorry to bother you. I just thought you might be interested in this
>> one, as it fixes build for "allmodconfig" configuration, hence it can
>> be related to stable branch. Also, maintainers didn't respond to that
>> patch, so I'm kinda dead in the water.
>>
>> Anyway, will try to ping maintainers one more time.
>
> I thought I had responded, I didn't see a reason why one would want to
> compile non-userspace kernel headers outside of the context of the
> kernel and if you do have to do that why not just add -D__linux__.
>
> However, I can also see the point that anything not in uapi/ pretty much
> by definition will be compiled with __linux__ defined so it actually
> doesn't make a discernable difference to just drop the ifdef and I'm
> fine with a patch like this.
>
> These trivial patches typically get picked up through kernel janitors,
> or maybe an akpm linux-next patch queue. In fact, I'm not even sure if
> there is a designated person I would be passing updates to, I've sent
> patches to akpm, viro, hellwig, linus, and gregkh at various times.
>
> Jan


Hi Jan,

Thank you for the reply. Good point, I will try to re-send this one to
Andrew Morton and kernel-janitors.

P.S. We need this patch for fixing LKFT/ci-loops build.

Thanks!

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 8:33 PM Sam Protsenko
<semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 3:04 PM, Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu> wrote:

> > I thought I had responded

I don't see your response either previously or now (currently only via
Sam's reply), perhaps you have an issue with mail delivery?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 3:04 PM Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 02:01:04PM +0200, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 8:34 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:05:49PM +0200, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> > >> Hi Greg,
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Sam Protsenko
> > >> <semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
> > >> > The kernel is self-contained project and can be built with bare-metal
> > >> > toolchain. But bare-metal toolchain doesn't define __linux__. Because of
> > >> > this u_quad_t type is not defined when using bare-metal toolchain and
> > >> > codafs build fails. This patch fixes it by defining u_quad_t type
> > >> > unconditionally.
> > >> >
> > >> > Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
> > >> > ---
> > >>
> > >> Can you please pull this one, if this applicable? I sent it a while
> > >> ago, but I guess it got lost in mailing list. It might be also
> > >> applicable to stable branch (as it fixes allmodconfig build for ARM
> > >> with bare-metal toolchain).
> > >
> > > Why are you asking me?  I'm not the maintainer of this file :(
> > >
> > > confused,
> > >
> >
> > Sorry to bother you. I just thought you might be interested in this
> > one, as it fixes build for "allmodconfig" configuration, hence it can
> > be related to stable branch. Also, maintainers didn't respond to that
> > patch, so I'm kinda dead in the water.
> >
> > Anyway, will try to ping maintainers one more time.
>
> I thought I had responded,

Oh, this one also was in Spam.

> I didn't see a reason why one would want to
> compile non-userspace kernel headers outside of the context of the
> kernel and if you do have to do that why not just add -D__linux__.
>
> However, I can also see the point that anything not in uapi/ pretty much
> by definition will be compiled with __linux__ defined so it actually
> doesn't make a discernable difference to just drop the ifdef and I'm
> fine with a patch like this.
>
> These trivial patches typically get picked up through kernel janitors,
> or maybe an akpm linux-next patch queue. In fact, I'm not even sure if
> there is a designated person I would be passing updates to, I've sent
> patches to akpm, viro, hellwig, linus, and gregkh at various times.

% scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f include/linux/coda.h
Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu> (maintainer:CODA FILE SYSTEM)
coda@cs.cmu.edu (maintainer:CODA FILE SYSTEM)
codalist@coda.cs.cmu.edu (open list:CODA FILE SYSTEM)
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org (open list)

Aren't you a maintainer?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

Re: [PATCH v2] codafs: Fix build using bare-metal toolchain

[Sam Protsenko]

Andy, btw, I'm observing some strange mail thread behavior here. I'm
pretty sure you responded to Jan, but he's not in the recipient list
in your last mail. If you check Jan's mail (the one you responded to),
you can notice new "reply-to" field (or "Mail-Followup-To:", in raw
mail). When you respond to his mail, you respond to that list. But Jan
is not in that list. That may be the cause of confusion we're seeing
here.

Anyway, mail settings aside, I'm glad this patch has found its way to
upstream. Thanks everyone.
On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 10:07 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 3:04 PM Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 02:01:04PM +0200, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 8:34 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:05:49PM +0200, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> > > >> Hi Greg,
> > > >>
> > > >> On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 10:03 PM, Sam Protsenko
> > > >> <semen.protsenko@linaro.org> wrote:
> > > >> > The kernel is self-contained project and can be built with bare-metal
> > > >> > toolchain. But bare-metal toolchain doesn't define __linux__. Because of
> > > >> > this u_quad_t type is not defined when using bare-metal toolchain and
> > > >> > codafs build fails. This patch fixes it by defining u_quad_t type
> > > >> > unconditionally.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@linaro.org>
> > > >> > ---
> > > >>
> > > >> Can you please pull this one, if this applicable? I sent it a while
> > > >> ago, but I guess it got lost in mailing list. It might be also
> > > >> applicable to stable branch (as it fixes allmodconfig build for ARM
> > > >> with bare-metal toolchain).
> > > >
> > > > Why are you asking me?  I'm not the maintainer of this file :(
> > > >
> > > > confused,
> > > >
> > >
> > > Sorry to bother you. I just thought you might be interested in this
> > > one, as it fixes build for "allmodconfig" configuration, hence it can
> > > be related to stable branch. Also, maintainers didn't respond to that
> > > patch, so I'm kinda dead in the water.
> > >
> > > Anyway, will try to ping maintainers one more time.
> >
> > I thought I had responded,
>
> Oh, this one also was in Spam.
>
> > I didn't see a reason why one would want to
> > compile non-userspace kernel headers outside of the context of the
> > kernel and if you do have to do that why not just add -D__linux__.
> >
> > However, I can also see the point that anything not in uapi/ pretty much
> > by definition will be compiled with __linux__ defined so it actually
> > doesn't make a discernable difference to just drop the ifdef and I'm
> > fine with a patch like this.
> >
> > These trivial patches typically get picked up through kernel janitors,
> > or maybe an akpm linux-next patch queue. In fact, I'm not even sure if
> > there is a designated person I would be passing updates to, I've sent
> > patches to akpm, viro, hellwig, linus, and gregkh at various times.
>
> % scripts/get_maintainer.pl -f include/linux/coda.h
> Jan Harkes <jaharkes@cs.cmu.edu> (maintainer:CODA FILE SYSTEM)
> coda@cs.cmu.edu (maintainer:CODA FILE SYSTEM)
> codalist@coda.cs.cmu.edu (open list:CODA FILE SYSTEM)
> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org (open list)
>
> Aren't you a maintainer?
>
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko