On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 02:59:21AM +0100, Tim Schmielau wrote:
> [apologies for the late reply, I do not follow lkml anymore]
>
> On Sun, 2008-06-08 at 14:17 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
>> On Sun, 2008-06-08 at 13:17 +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>> > #if !defined(CONFIG_M68K) || !defined(__KERNEL__)
>>
>> That's just scary, and broken for m68k where in userspace neither
>> CONFIG_M68K nor __KERNEL__ will be defined, so the unwanted ac_ahz
>> member will actually show up and break the binary compatibility.
>> Assuming we _don't_ want the ac_ahz member to be included on m68k,
>> this
>> should fix it (is __mc68000__ the right thing to use?)...
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/acct.h b/include/linux/acct.h
>> index e8cae54..228473b 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/acct.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/acct.h
>> @@ -58,8 +58,7 @@ struct acct
>> comp_t ac_minflt; /* Minor Pagefaults */
>> comp_t ac_majflt; /* Major Pagefaults */
>> comp_t ac_swaps; /* Number of Swaps */
>> -/* m68k had no padding here. */
>> -#if !defined(CONFIG_M68K) || !defined(__KERNEL__)
>> +#ifndef __mc68000__ /* m68k had no padding here. */
>> __u16 ac_ahz; /* AHZ */
>> #endif
>> __u32 ac_exitcode; /* Exitcode */
struct acct as provided by the kernel anyway differs from the one
shipped by glibc in /usr/include/sys/acct.h since your
"BSD accounting format rework" patch back in 2004.
Does the pre-v3 stuff actually work?
My first impression is that it doesn't and should therefore be removed.
> This would make cross-compiled m68k kernels silently write wrong
> accounting files.
>...
Cross-compiling can't make any difference here.
> Tim
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
