Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [BUG] Linux 3.0 commit 3627924acf70a broke include/mtd/ubi_user.h. | From | Artem Bityutskiy <> | Date | Mon, 15 Aug 2011 06:42:27 +0300 |
| |
On Mon, 2011-08-15 at 06:39 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Sun, 2011-08-14 at 14:16 -0500, Rob Landley wrote: > > On 08/14/2011 01:03 PM, Stefan Richter wrote: > > > On Aug 14 Rob Landley wrote: > > >> "make headers_install" copies include/mtd/ubi_user.h to userspace, where > > >> things like busybox link against it. With 3.0, building defconfig > > >> busybox gets this error: > > >> > > >> In file included from miscutils/ubi_tools.c:63: > > >> /home/landley/aboriginal/aboriginal/build/simple-cross-compiler-i686/bin/../include/mtd/ubi-user.h:329: > > >> error: conflicting types for '__packed' > > >> /home/landley/aboriginal/aboriginal/build/simple-cross-compiler-i686/bin/../include/mtd/ubi-user.h:313: > > >> error: previous declaration of '__packed' was here > > >> > > >> This is due to the Linux 3.0 commit in the title: > > >> > > >> UBI: use __packed instead of __attribute__((packed)) > > >> > > >> This relies on __packed being defined in: > > >> > > >> include/linux/compiler-gcc.h: > > >> #define __packed __attribute__((packed)) > > >> > > >> Which is not exported to userspace. > > >> > > >> I.E. this "cleanup" broke the ability for userspace to use this header, > > >> even though the header is exported to userspace by headers_install. > > > > > > As far as I can tell, the __packed or __attribute__((packed)) > > > qualifications are superfluous in include/mtd/ubi-user.h anyway. > > > > And Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@nokia.com> (the other listed UBI > > maintainer) also bounces. Did the developer exodus after Nokia decided > > to cozy up to The Black Widow take 'em both out? > > Yes, both of us have left Nokia recently. Adrian should fix the > "MAINTAINERS" file. > > WRT to the breakage - yes, it was my mistake to follow the new trend in > the Linux kernel - the commit message has a reference to the other > commit which inspired the check, and you can find out that some other > projects made a similar change. Moreover, checkpatch.pl prints the > following warning "WARN("__packed is preferred over > __attribute__((packed))". So you hardly can blame :-) > > Anyways, this problem was discussed in the "__packed vs. > __attribute__((packed)) in kernel headers" thread in LKML. > > Then a fix has been sent, see the "{PATCH] fix __packed in exported > kernel headers" thread in LKML. This fix was accepted by "Michal Marek > <mmarek@suse.cz>", whom I put to CC.
And the fix is upstream, see:
commit f210735fe2f17a6225432ee3d1239bcf23a8659c Author: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@trippelsdorf.de> Date: Fri Jun 24 15:51:00 2011 +0200
Probably someone can ping the -stable team and ask them to take it to linux-3.0-stable?
-- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём)
-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |