Am Montag, 8. Juli 2024, 10:58:35 CEST schrieb Helge Deller: > On 7/8/24 10:13, Florian Weimer wrote: > > * Helge Deller: > > > >> diff --git a/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/hppa/sys/cachectl.h b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/hppa/sys/cachectl.h > >> new file mode 100644 > >> index 0000000000..16e47d1329 > >> --- /dev/null > >> +++ b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/hppa/sys/cachectl.h > >> @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@ > > > >> +#ifndef _SYS_CACHECTL_H > >> +#define _SYS_CACHECTL_H 1 > >> + > >> +#include <features.h> > >> + > >> +/* Get the kernel definition for the op bits. */ > >> +#include <asm/cachectl.h> > > > > This makes this header (<sys/cachectl.h>) unusable with older kernel > > headers. I think it also results in a test failure with older headers. > > Is this a problem? > > hppa lives in debian unstable, so basically you should always use > the latest kernel & kernel headers when upgrading glibc. Ahem. https://www.gentoo.org/downloads/#hppa > So, personally I think it's ok to ask people to upgrade. > Dave, any opinion on this? > > > In similar cases, we use LINUX_VERSION_CODE checks (for older compilers) > > and __has_include to support backports. > > I'd prefer to not add additional checks. > Another (maybe easier) possibility is to simply backport the kernel asm/cachectl.h > file (just the header, not the implementation, so the syscall will return -ENOSYS on > older kernels): > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=c6d96328fecdda16e12f3b3c33f3677f4bcef89f > > Helge > -- Andreas K. Hüttel dilfridge@xxxxxxxxxx Gentoo Linux developer (council, toolchain, base-system, perl, libreoffice)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
