Hi Arnd, On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 16:35:57 +0200 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> > > If we start validating the existence of the asm-generic side of > generated headers, this one causes a warning: > > make[3]: *** No rule to make target 'arch/um/include/generated/asm/bpf_perf_event.h', needed by 'all'. Stop. > > The problem is that the asm-generic header only exists for the uapi > variant, but arch/um has no uapi headers and instead uses the x86 > userspace API. > > Add a custom file with an explicit redirect to avoid this. > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> > --- > arch/um/include/asm/Kbuild | 1 - > arch/um/include/asm/bpf_perf_event.h | 3 +++ > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > create mode 100644 arch/um/include/asm/bpf_perf_event.h > > diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/Kbuild b/arch/um/include/asm/Kbuild > index 6fe34779291a..6c583040537c 100644 > --- a/arch/um/include/asm/Kbuild > +++ b/arch/um/include/asm/Kbuild > @@ -1,5 +1,4 @@ > # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > -generic-y += bpf_perf_event.h > generic-y += bug.h > generic-y += compat.h > generic-y += current.h > diff --git a/arch/um/include/asm/bpf_perf_event.h b/arch/um/include/asm/bpf_perf_event.h > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..0a30420c83de > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/um/include/asm/bpf_perf_event.h > @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > + > +#include <asm-generic/bpf_perf_event.h> Just wondering if that file should have some explanatory comment in it to prevent it being cleaned up in a few years ... or at least to explain why it causes the above error when removed. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell
Attachment:
pgpvn1L8F6UXb.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
