Re: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-18 Thread Robert P. J. Day 
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 12:17:20 EST, "Robert P. J. Day" said:
>
> > if that header file isn't used by any kernel code, why bother having a
> > check for __KERNEL__ in the first place?  it's being exported to
> > userspace unchecked:
> >
> >   include/linux/Kbuild:header-y += hdsmart.h
> >
> > so why not just toss that check entirely?  otherwise, you're going to
> > get a header file exported to userspace that has a superfluous
> > __KERNEL__ test in it.
>
> Umm... if the kernel isn't using it, why are we bothering to export
> it to userspace at all?  Or is the kernel using something *else*
> that should be going to userspace instead?

beats me, i just observe 'em, i don't make those judgment calls.  :-)

rday
--


Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry:
Have classroom, will lecture.

http://crashcourse.ca  Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-18 Thread Robert P. J. Day 
On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 12:17:20 EST, Robert P. J. Day said:

  if that header file isn't used by any kernel code, why bother having a
  check for __KERNEL__ in the first place?  it's being exported to
  userspace unchecked:
 
include/linux/Kbuild:header-y += hdsmart.h
 
  so why not just toss that check entirely?  otherwise, you're going to
  get a header file exported to userspace that has a superfluous
  __KERNEL__ test in it.

 Umm... if the kernel isn't using it, why are we bothering to export
 it to userspace at all?  Or is the kernel using something *else*
 that should be going to userspace instead?

beats me, i just observe 'em, i don't make those judgment calls.  :-)

rday
--


Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry:
Have classroom, will lecture.

http://crashcourse.ca  Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-17 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks 
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 12:17:20 EST, "Robert P. J. Day" said:

> if that header file isn't used by any kernel code, why bother having a
> check for __KERNEL__ in the first place?  it's being exported to
> userspace unchecked:
> 
>   include/linux/Kbuild:header-y += hdsmart.h
> 
> so why not just toss that check entirely?  otherwise, you're going to
> get a header file exported to userspace that has a superfluous
> __KERNEL__ test in it.

Umm... if the kernel isn't using it, why are we bothering to export it to
userspace at all?  Or is the kernel using something *else* that should be going
to userspace instead?


pgpNeJqmI4gl1.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-17 Thread Robert P. J. Day 
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:

> On Sunday 17 February 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 06:40:31PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > > On Sunday 17 February 2008, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Fix goofups of commit 76166952bbc81dda1c8a8c14e75a2aa06f6c052c
> > > > > (" is not used by kernel code").
> > > > >
> > > > > Reported-by: "Robert P. J. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  include/linux/hdsmart.h |4 ++--
> > > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Index: b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
> > > > > ===
> > > > > --- a/include/linux/hdsmart.h
> > > > > +++ b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
> > > > > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
> > > > >  #ifndef _LINUX_HDSMART_H
> > > > >  #define _LINUX_HDSMART_H
> > > > >
> > > > > -#ifndef __KERNEL
> > > > > +#ifndef __KERNEL__
> > > > >  #define OFFLINE_FULL_SCAN0
> > > > >  #define SHORT_SELF_TEST  1
> > > > >  #define EXTEND_SELF_TEST 2
> > > > > @@ -121,6 +121,6 @@ typedef struct ata_smart_selftestlog_s {
> > > > >   unsigned char   resevered[2];
> > > > >   unsigned char   chksum;
> > > > >  } __attribute__ ((packed)) ata_smart_selftestlog_t;
> > > > > -#endif /* __KERNEL__ *
> > > > > +#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
> > > > >
> > > > >  #endif   /* _LINUX_HDSMART_H */
> > > >
> > > > if that header file isn't used by any kernel code, why bother having a
> > > > check for __KERNEL__ in the first place?  it's being exported to
> > > > userspace unchecked:
> > > >
> > > >   include/linux/Kbuild:header-y += hdsmart.h
> > > >
> > > > so why not just toss that check entirely?  otherwise, you're going to
> > > > get a header file exported to userspace that has a superfluous
> > > > __KERNEL__ test in it.
> > >
> > > We don't want new (accidental etc.) kernel users of this header.
> > >...
> >
> > Why can't we simply remove it?
>
> If it is safe w.r.t. userspace then please do it.
>
> [ I don't know and I couldn't get an answer on LKML so... ]
>
> Thanks,
> Bart

i'll leave that decision in someone else's hands.  have fun.

rday
--


Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry:
Have classroom, will lecture.

http://crashcourse.ca  Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-17 Thread Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 
On Sunday 17 February 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 06:40:31PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > On Sunday 17 February 2008, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > > On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Fix goofups of commit 76166952bbc81dda1c8a8c14e75a2aa06f6c052c
> > > > (" is not used by kernel code").
> > > >
> > > > Reported-by: "Robert P. J. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > ---
> > > >  include/linux/hdsmart.h |4 ++--
> > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > Index: b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
> > > > ===
> > > > --- a/include/linux/hdsmart.h
> > > > +++ b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
> > > > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
> > > >  #ifndef _LINUX_HDSMART_H
> > > >  #define _LINUX_HDSMART_H
> > > >
> > > > -#ifndef __KERNEL
> > > > +#ifndef __KERNEL__
> > > >  #define OFFLINE_FULL_SCAN  0
> > > >  #define SHORT_SELF_TEST1
> > > >  #define EXTEND_SELF_TEST   2
> > > > @@ -121,6 +121,6 @@ typedef struct ata_smart_selftestlog_s {
> > > > unsigned char   resevered[2];
> > > > unsigned char   chksum;
> > > >  } __attribute__ ((packed)) ata_smart_selftestlog_t;
> > > > -#endif /* __KERNEL__ *
> > > > +#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
> > > >
> > > >  #endif /* _LINUX_HDSMART_H */
> > > 
> > > if that header file isn't used by any kernel code, why bother having a
> > > check for __KERNEL__ in the first place?  it's being exported to
> > > userspace unchecked:
> > > 
> > >   include/linux/Kbuild:header-y += hdsmart.h
> > > 
> > > so why not just toss that check entirely?  otherwise, you're going to
> > > get a header file exported to userspace that has a superfluous
> > > __KERNEL__ test in it.
> > 
> > We don't want new (accidental etc.) kernel users of this header. 
> >...
> 
> Why can't we simply remove it?

If it is safe w.r.t. userspace then please do it.

[ I don't know and I couldn't get an answer on LKML so... ]

Thanks,
Bart
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-17 Thread Adrian Bunk 
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 06:40:31PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> On Sunday 17 February 2008, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> > 
> > > Fix goofups of commit 76166952bbc81dda1c8a8c14e75a2aa06f6c052c
> > > (" is not used by kernel code").
> > >
> > > Reported-by: "Robert P. J. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > ---
> > >  include/linux/hdsmart.h |4 ++--
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > Index: b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
> > > ===
> > > --- a/include/linux/hdsmart.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
> > > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
> > >  #ifndef _LINUX_HDSMART_H
> > >  #define _LINUX_HDSMART_H
> > >
> > > -#ifndef __KERNEL
> > > +#ifndef __KERNEL__
> > >  #define OFFLINE_FULL_SCAN0
> > >  #define SHORT_SELF_TEST  1
> > >  #define EXTEND_SELF_TEST 2
> > > @@ -121,6 +121,6 @@ typedef struct ata_smart_selftestlog_s {
> > >   unsigned char   resevered[2];
> > >   unsigned char   chksum;
> > >  } __attribute__ ((packed)) ata_smart_selftestlog_t;
> > > -#endif /* __KERNEL__ *
> > > +#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
> > >
> > >  #endif   /* _LINUX_HDSMART_H */
> > 
> > if that header file isn't used by any kernel code, why bother having a
> > check for __KERNEL__ in the first place?  it's being exported to
> > userspace unchecked:
> > 
> >   include/linux/Kbuild:header-y += hdsmart.h
> > 
> > so why not just toss that check entirely?  otherwise, you're going to
> > get a header file exported to userspace that has a superfluous
> > __KERNEL__ test in it.
> 
> We don't want new (accidental etc.) kernel users of this header. 
>...

Why can't we simply remove it?

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-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-17 Thread Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 
On Sunday 17 February 2008, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> 
> > Fix goofups of commit 76166952bbc81dda1c8a8c14e75a2aa06f6c052c
> > (" is not used by kernel code").
> >
> > Reported-by: "Robert P. J. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/hdsmart.h |4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > Index: b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
> > ===
> > --- a/include/linux/hdsmart.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
> > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
> >  #ifndef _LINUX_HDSMART_H
> >  #define _LINUX_HDSMART_H
> >
> > -#ifndef __KERNEL
> > +#ifndef __KERNEL__
> >  #define OFFLINE_FULL_SCAN  0
> >  #define SHORT_SELF_TEST1
> >  #define EXTEND_SELF_TEST   2
> > @@ -121,6 +121,6 @@ typedef struct ata_smart_selftestlog_s {
> > unsigned char   resevered[2];
> > unsigned char   chksum;
> >  } __attribute__ ((packed)) ata_smart_selftestlog_t;
> > -#endif /* __KERNEL__ *
> > +#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
> >
> >  #endif /* _LINUX_HDSMART_H */
> 
> if that header file isn't used by any kernel code, why bother having a
> check for __KERNEL__ in the first place?  it's being exported to
> userspace unchecked:
> 
>   include/linux/Kbuild:header-y += hdsmart.h
> 
> so why not just toss that check entirely?  otherwise, you're going to
> get a header file exported to userspace that has a superfluous
> __KERNEL__ test in it.

We don't want new (accidental etc.) kernel users of this header. 

How's about this version?

From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups (take 2)

Fix goofups of commit 76166952bbc81dda1c8a8c14e75a2aa06f6c052c
(" is not used by kernel code").

Also update include/linux/Kbuild to reflect the fact that hdsmart.h
uses __KERNEL__ ifdefs now.

Reported-by: "Robert P. J. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
 include/linux/Kbuild|2 +-
 include/linux/hdsmart.h |4 ++--
 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Index: b/include/linux/Kbuild
===
--- a/include/linux/Kbuild
+++ b/include/linux/Kbuild
@@ -70,7 +70,6 @@ header-y += fuse.h
 header-y += genetlink.h
 header-y += gen_stats.h
 header-y += gigaset_dev.h
-header-y += hdsmart.h
 header-y += hysdn_if.h
 header-y += i2o-dev.h
 header-y += i8k.h
@@ -211,6 +210,7 @@ unifdef-y += hayesesp.h
 unifdef-y += hdlcdrv.h
 unifdef-y += hdlc.h
 unifdef-y += hdreg.h
+unifdef-y += hdsmart.h
 unifdef-y += hiddev.h
 unifdef-y += hpet.h
 unifdef-y += i2c.h
Index: b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
===
--- a/include/linux/hdsmart.h
+++ b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
 #ifndef _LINUX_HDSMART_H
 #define _LINUX_HDSMART_H
 
-#ifndef __KERNEL
+#ifndef __KERNEL__
 #define OFFLINE_FULL_SCAN  0
 #define SHORT_SELF_TEST1
 #define EXTEND_SELF_TEST   2
@@ -121,6 +121,6 @@ typedef struct ata_smart_selftestlog_s {
unsigned char   resevered[2];
unsigned char   chksum;
 } __attribute__ ((packed)) ata_smart_selftestlog_t;
-#endif /* __KERNEL__ *
+#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
 
 #endif /* _LINUX_HDSMART_H */
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-17 Thread Robert P. J. Day 
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:

> Fix goofups of commit 76166952bbc81dda1c8a8c14e75a2aa06f6c052c
> (" is not used by kernel code").
>
> Reported-by: "Robert P. J. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
>  include/linux/hdsmart.h |4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> Index: b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
> ===
> --- a/include/linux/hdsmart.h
> +++ b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
>  #ifndef _LINUX_HDSMART_H
>  #define _LINUX_HDSMART_H
>
> -#ifndef __KERNEL
> +#ifndef __KERNEL__
>  #define OFFLINE_FULL_SCAN0
>  #define SHORT_SELF_TEST  1
>  #define EXTEND_SELF_TEST 2
> @@ -121,6 +121,6 @@ typedef struct ata_smart_selftestlog_s {
>   unsigned char   resevered[2];
>   unsigned char   chksum;
>  } __attribute__ ((packed)) ata_smart_selftestlog_t;
> -#endif /* __KERNEL__ *
> +#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
>
>  #endif   /* _LINUX_HDSMART_H */

if that header file isn't used by any kernel code, why bother having a
check for __KERNEL__ in the first place?  it's being exported to
userspace unchecked:

  include/linux/Kbuild:header-y += hdsmart.h

so why not just toss that check entirely?  otherwise, you're going to
get a header file exported to userspace that has a superfluous
__KERNEL__ test in it.

rday
--



Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry:
Have classroom, will lecture.

http://crashcourse.ca  Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-17 Thread Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 
Fix goofups of commit 76166952bbc81dda1c8a8c14e75a2aa06f6c052c
(" is not used by kernel code").

Reported-by: "Robert P. J. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
 include/linux/hdsmart.h |4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Index: b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
===
--- a/include/linux/hdsmart.h
+++ b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
 #ifndef _LINUX_HDSMART_H
 #define _LINUX_HDSMART_H
 
-#ifndef __KERNEL
+#ifndef __KERNEL__
 #define OFFLINE_FULL_SCAN  0
 #define SHORT_SELF_TEST1
 #define EXTEND_SELF_TEST   2
@@ -121,6 +121,6 @@ typedef struct ata_smart_selftestlog_s {
unsigned char   resevered[2];
unsigned char   chksum;
 } __attribute__ ((packed)) ata_smart_selftestlog_t;
-#endif /* __KERNEL__ *
+#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
 
 #endif /* _LINUX_HDSMART_H */
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-17 Thread Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 
Fix goofups of commit 76166952bbc81dda1c8a8c14e75a2aa06f6c052c
(linux/hdsmart.h is not used by kernel code).

Reported-by: Robert P. J. Day [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
 include/linux/hdsmart.h |4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Index: b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
===
--- a/include/linux/hdsmart.h
+++ b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
 #ifndef _LINUX_HDSMART_H
 #define _LINUX_HDSMART_H
 
-#ifndef __KERNEL
+#ifndef __KERNEL__
 #define OFFLINE_FULL_SCAN  0
 #define SHORT_SELF_TEST1
 #define EXTEND_SELF_TEST   2
@@ -121,6 +121,6 @@ typedef struct ata_smart_selftestlog_s {
unsigned char   resevered[2];
unsigned char   chksum;
 } __attribute__ ((packed)) ata_smart_selftestlog_t;
-#endif /* __KERNEL__ *
+#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
 
 #endif /* _LINUX_HDSMART_H */
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-17 Thread Robert P. J. Day 
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:

 Fix goofups of commit 76166952bbc81dda1c8a8c14e75a2aa06f6c052c
 (linux/hdsmart.h is not used by kernel code).

 Reported-by: Robert P. J. Day [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ---
  include/linux/hdsmart.h |4 ++--
  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

 Index: b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
 ===
 --- a/include/linux/hdsmart.h
 +++ b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
 @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
  #ifndef _LINUX_HDSMART_H
  #define _LINUX_HDSMART_H

 -#ifndef __KERNEL
 +#ifndef __KERNEL__
  #define OFFLINE_FULL_SCAN0
  #define SHORT_SELF_TEST  1
  #define EXTEND_SELF_TEST 2
 @@ -121,6 +121,6 @@ typedef struct ata_smart_selftestlog_s {
   unsigned char   resevered[2];
   unsigned char   chksum;
  } __attribute__ ((packed)) ata_smart_selftestlog_t;
 -#endif /* __KERNEL__ *
 +#endif /* __KERNEL__ */

  #endif   /* _LINUX_HDSMART_H */

if that header file isn't used by any kernel code, why bother having a
check for __KERNEL__ in the first place?  it's being exported to
userspace unchecked:

  include/linux/Kbuild:header-y += hdsmart.h

so why not just toss that check entirely?  otherwise, you're going to
get a header file exported to userspace that has a superfluous
__KERNEL__ test in it.

rday
--



Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry:
Have classroom, will lecture.

http://crashcourse.ca  Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-17 Thread Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 
On Sunday 17 February 2008, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
 On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
 
  Fix goofups of commit 76166952bbc81dda1c8a8c14e75a2aa06f6c052c
  (linux/hdsmart.h is not used by kernel code).
 
  Reported-by: Robert P. J. Day [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  ---
   include/linux/hdsmart.h |4 ++--
   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
 
  Index: b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
  ===
  --- a/include/linux/hdsmart.h
  +++ b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
  @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
   #ifndef _LINUX_HDSMART_H
   #define _LINUX_HDSMART_H
 
  -#ifndef __KERNEL
  +#ifndef __KERNEL__
   #define OFFLINE_FULL_SCAN  0
   #define SHORT_SELF_TEST1
   #define EXTEND_SELF_TEST   2
  @@ -121,6 +121,6 @@ typedef struct ata_smart_selftestlog_s {
  unsigned char   resevered[2];
  unsigned char   chksum;
   } __attribute__ ((packed)) ata_smart_selftestlog_t;
  -#endif /* __KERNEL__ *
  +#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
 
   #endif /* _LINUX_HDSMART_H */
 
 if that header file isn't used by any kernel code, why bother having a
 check for __KERNEL__ in the first place?  it's being exported to
 userspace unchecked:
 
   include/linux/Kbuild:header-y += hdsmart.h
 
 so why not just toss that check entirely?  otherwise, you're going to
 get a header file exported to userspace that has a superfluous
 __KERNEL__ test in it.

We don't want new (accidental etc.) kernel users of this header. 

How's about this version?

From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups (take 2)

Fix goofups of commit 76166952bbc81dda1c8a8c14e75a2aa06f6c052c
(linux/hdsmart.h is not used by kernel code).

Also update include/linux/Kbuild to reflect the fact that hdsmart.h
uses __KERNEL__ ifdefs now.

Reported-by: Robert P. J. Day [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
 include/linux/Kbuild|2 +-
 include/linux/hdsmart.h |4 ++--
 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Index: b/include/linux/Kbuild
===
--- a/include/linux/Kbuild
+++ b/include/linux/Kbuild
@@ -70,7 +70,6 @@ header-y += fuse.h
 header-y += genetlink.h
 header-y += gen_stats.h
 header-y += gigaset_dev.h
-header-y += hdsmart.h
 header-y += hysdn_if.h
 header-y += i2o-dev.h
 header-y += i8k.h
@@ -211,6 +210,7 @@ unifdef-y += hayesesp.h
 unifdef-y += hdlcdrv.h
 unifdef-y += hdlc.h
 unifdef-y += hdreg.h
+unifdef-y += hdsmart.h
 unifdef-y += hiddev.h
 unifdef-y += hpet.h
 unifdef-y += i2c.h
Index: b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
===
--- a/include/linux/hdsmart.h
+++ b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
 #ifndef _LINUX_HDSMART_H
 #define _LINUX_HDSMART_H
 
-#ifndef __KERNEL
+#ifndef __KERNEL__
 #define OFFLINE_FULL_SCAN  0
 #define SHORT_SELF_TEST1
 #define EXTEND_SELF_TEST   2
@@ -121,6 +121,6 @@ typedef struct ata_smart_selftestlog_s {
unsigned char   resevered[2];
unsigned char   chksum;
 } __attribute__ ((packed)) ata_smart_selftestlog_t;
-#endif /* __KERNEL__ *
+#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
 
 #endif /* _LINUX_HDSMART_H */
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-17 Thread Adrian Bunk 
On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 06:40:31PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
 On Sunday 17 February 2008, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
  On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
  
   Fix goofups of commit 76166952bbc81dda1c8a8c14e75a2aa06f6c052c
   (linux/hdsmart.h is not used by kernel code).
  
   Reported-by: Robert P. J. Day [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   ---
include/linux/hdsmart.h |4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
  
   Index: b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
   ===
   --- a/include/linux/hdsmart.h
   +++ b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
   @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
#ifndef _LINUX_HDSMART_H
#define _LINUX_HDSMART_H
  
   -#ifndef __KERNEL
   +#ifndef __KERNEL__
#define OFFLINE_FULL_SCAN0
#define SHORT_SELF_TEST  1
#define EXTEND_SELF_TEST 2
   @@ -121,6 +121,6 @@ typedef struct ata_smart_selftestlog_s {
 unsigned char   resevered[2];
 unsigned char   chksum;
} __attribute__ ((packed)) ata_smart_selftestlog_t;
   -#endif /* __KERNEL__ *
   +#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
  
#endif   /* _LINUX_HDSMART_H */
  
  if that header file isn't used by any kernel code, why bother having a
  check for __KERNEL__ in the first place?  it's being exported to
  userspace unchecked:
  
include/linux/Kbuild:header-y += hdsmart.h
  
  so why not just toss that check entirely?  otherwise, you're going to
  get a header file exported to userspace that has a superfluous
  __KERNEL__ test in it.
 
 We don't want new (accidental etc.) kernel users of this header. 
...

Why can't we simply remove it?

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-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-17 Thread Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz 
On Sunday 17 February 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote:
 On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 06:40:31PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
  On Sunday 17 February 2008, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
   On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
   
Fix goofups of commit 76166952bbc81dda1c8a8c14e75a2aa06f6c052c
(linux/hdsmart.h is not used by kernel code).
   
Reported-by: Robert P. J. Day [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
 include/linux/hdsmart.h |4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
   
Index: b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
===
--- a/include/linux/hdsmart.h
+++ b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
 #ifndef _LINUX_HDSMART_H
 #define _LINUX_HDSMART_H
   
-#ifndef __KERNEL
+#ifndef __KERNEL__
 #define OFFLINE_FULL_SCAN  0
 #define SHORT_SELF_TEST1
 #define EXTEND_SELF_TEST   2
@@ -121,6 +121,6 @@ typedef struct ata_smart_selftestlog_s {
unsigned char   resevered[2];
unsigned char   chksum;
 } __attribute__ ((packed)) ata_smart_selftestlog_t;
-#endif /* __KERNEL__ *
+#endif /* __KERNEL__ */
   
 #endif /* _LINUX_HDSMART_H */
   
   if that header file isn't used by any kernel code, why bother having a
   check for __KERNEL__ in the first place?  it's being exported to
   userspace unchecked:
   
 include/linux/Kbuild:header-y += hdsmart.h
   
   so why not just toss that check entirely?  otherwise, you're going to
   get a header file exported to userspace that has a superfluous
   __KERNEL__ test in it.
  
  We don't want new (accidental etc.) kernel users of this header. 
 ...
 
 Why can't we simply remove it?

If it is safe w.r.t. userspace then please do it.

[ I don't know and I couldn't get an answer on LKML so... ]

Thanks,
Bart
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-17 Thread Robert P. J. Day 
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:

 On Sunday 17 February 2008, Adrian Bunk wrote:
  On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 06:40:31PM +0100, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
   On Sunday 17 February 2008, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
   
 Fix goofups of commit 76166952bbc81dda1c8a8c14e75a2aa06f6c052c
 (linux/hdsmart.h is not used by kernel code).

 Reported-by: Robert P. J. Day [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ---
  include/linux/hdsmart.h |4 ++--
  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

 Index: b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
 ===
 --- a/include/linux/hdsmart.h
 +++ b/include/linux/hdsmart.h
 @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
  #ifndef _LINUX_HDSMART_H
  #define _LINUX_HDSMART_H

 -#ifndef __KERNEL
 +#ifndef __KERNEL__
  #define OFFLINE_FULL_SCAN0
  #define SHORT_SELF_TEST  1
  #define EXTEND_SELF_TEST 2
 @@ -121,6 +121,6 @@ typedef struct ata_smart_selftestlog_s {
   unsigned char   resevered[2];
   unsigned char   chksum;
  } __attribute__ ((packed)) ata_smart_selftestlog_t;
 -#endif /* __KERNEL__ *
 +#endif /* __KERNEL__ */

  #endif   /* _LINUX_HDSMART_H */
   
if that header file isn't used by any kernel code, why bother having a
check for __KERNEL__ in the first place?  it's being exported to
userspace unchecked:
   
  include/linux/Kbuild:header-y += hdsmart.h
   
so why not just toss that check entirely?  otherwise, you're going to
get a header file exported to userspace that has a superfluous
__KERNEL__ test in it.
  
   We don't want new (accidental etc.) kernel users of this header.
  ...
 
  Why can't we simply remove it?

 If it is safe w.r.t. userspace then please do it.

 [ I don't know and I couldn't get an answer on LKML so... ]

 Thanks,
 Bart

i'll leave that decision in someone else's hands.  have fun.

rday
--


Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry:
Have classroom, will lecture.

http://crashcourse.ca  Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: [PATCH] linux/hdsmart.h: fix goofups

2008-02-17 Thread Valdis . Kletnieks 
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 12:17:20 EST, Robert P. J. Day said:

 if that header file isn't used by any kernel code, why bother having a
 check for __KERNEL__ in the first place?  it's being exported to
 userspace unchecked:
 
   include/linux/Kbuild:header-y += hdsmart.h
 
 so why not just toss that check entirely?  otherwise, you're going to
 get a header file exported to userspace that has a superfluous
 __KERNEL__ test in it.

Umm... if the kernel isn't using it, why are we bothering to export it to
userspace at all?  Or is the kernel using something *else* that should be going
to userspace instead?


pgpNeJqmI4gl1.pgp
Description: PGP signature