Re: backports spatch question

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On 7/5/21 12:26 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Mon, 2021-07-05 at 12:26 -0700, Ben Greear wrote:
On 7/5/21 12:19 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Mon, 2021-07-05 at 12:17 -0700, Ben Greear wrote:

Did you test it?

Yes, pretty sure we do it basically all the time. We don't have kernels
that new yet in most of our test setups.

    Because that should be logically identical to what I tried if I read this file properly:

Actually, your version might be more correct than ours ...

I dunno. I note we also have an <linux/rfkill.h> include in cfg80211.h,
but that should be there upstream too, so not sure.

There are a lot of rfkill.h files, what logic makes the backports code include the specific
backport/backport-include/linux/rfkill.h file?  I suspect that isn't working for the cfg80211.h
file for whatever reason.

It's just an additional -I flag on the compiler command line, or -
isystem or something like that.


my cfg80211.h shows this line:

#include <uapi/linux/rfkill.h>

As does stock 5.13 upstream kernel.

So I guess that would not include the hacked backport/backport-include/linux/rfkill.h

I can probably hack around that one way or another, but suggestions for proper fix?


Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Candela Technologies Inc

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe backports" in

[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux