On Wed, 2017-02-22 at 14:03 +0100, greg@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 07:50:46AM +0000, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > On Wed, 2017-02-22 at 08:10 +0100, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 04:24:04PM +0100, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > > > C++ does does not like the extra extern before asmlinkage, remove it. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > include/linux/printk.h | 4 ++-- > > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/printk.h b/include/linux/printk.h > > > > index 3472cc6..be823f5 100644 > > > > --- a/include/linux/printk.h > > > > +++ b/include/linux/printk.h > > > > > > > > > Why are you building this file with a C++ compiler? > > > > virtualbox uses C++ and includes various kernel headers and the build > > fails, virtualbox guest additions has not build for quite some time now and > > this is one of the problems. > > Virtualbox is a horrid pile of crap. You can quote me on that. We > don't care about out-of-tree drivers, the authors should work to get > them merged properly if they do care. Sure, I believe you :) But in this case it is not the kernel modules that fails, it is their guest additions/xf86 video driver. Seem like that these need to include some kernel herders there too. > > Kernel code should be C, not C++, and if you do want to use C++, then > you are on your own, sorry. But there are already a lot of C++ adjustments!? Just grepping for __cplusplus shows plenty of hits and what is the point of asmlinkage then: #ifdef __cplusplus #define CPP_ASMLINKAGE extern "C" #else #define CPP_ASMLINKAGE #endif #ifndef asmlinkage #define asmlinkage CPP_ASMLINKAGE #endif I read all of this that C++ code should be able to at least include kernel headers without fatal errors. You don't agree? In that case all __cplusplus/asmlinkage should be removed? > > > > Also, this is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the > > > stable kernel tree. Please read Documentation/stable_kernel_rules.txt > > > for how to do this properly. > > > > Sorry, I was in a hurry(lazy:) so I just included stable directly as > > I know it needs to be fixed in 4.9 as well. > > But that's not how to get a patch into the stable tree :( > > sorry, Right, my mistake. No need to be sorry, I got what I deserved :) Jocke > > greg k-h