On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 5:14 PM Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 8:28 PM Miguel Ojeda > <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > By the way, is it possible that scripts/ and similar stuff uses > > directly include/linux/compiler_attributes.h (whenever it hits > > mainline, see https://github.com/ojeda/linux/blob/compiler-attributes/include/linux/compiler_attributes.h > > )? It is a header that does not depend on anything, so it could easily > > be shared; and would avoid having to maintain two sets of attributes. > > Let me know, I can take a look at it if you think it is a good idea. Landed a couple of weeks ago. > No. > I want to share a header file between kernel and host-tools > only when we need to do so. > > In this case, it is wrong to use the linker magic for the host tool > if you look at the so ugly #if defined(__MACH__) part. Do you mean this line? #define SECTION(name) __attribute__((section("__TEXT, " #name))) I would say having exceptions is fine, i.e. the idea was to reduce "duplicated" definitions. In this case, the #define has a different name and style, so I would say it is clear. Anyway, if the policy is not sharing headers at all, that is fine! Cheers, Miguel
