Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] build: Add include check on syscall.h

[Lluís Vilanova]

Peter Maydell writes:

> On 29 January 2016 at 13:30, Lluís Vilanova  wrote:
>> Peter Maydell writes:
>>> Adding include guards is fine, but it sounds to me like what we
>>> should actually do to fix this confusion is rename all the linux-user
>>> local headers to target_syscall.h.
>> 
>> Hmmm, I didn't know if using the same name was on purpose or not. If the
>> intention was *not* to override the system's syscall.h, then a rename is the
>> proper solution.


> Yes, the intention is absolutely not to override any system header
> (the constants defined are only relevant to the guest, and if the
> header got included and overrode the host's syscall.h then nothing
> would work and it probably wouldn't even compile). It just ended up
> with the same name by accident.

Aha, then I'll resend with the filles renamed.

Cheers,
  Lluis

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] build: Add include check on syscall.h

[Lluís Vilanova]

Peter Maydell writes:

> On 28 January 2016 at 20:36, Lluís Vilanova  wrote:
>> The LTTng tracing backend includes the system's "syscall.h", but QEMU
>> replaces it with its own for linux-user builds. This results in a double
>> include on some targets (when LTTng is enabled).
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Lluís Vilanova 

> Adding include guards is fine, but it sounds to me like what we
> should actually do to fix this confusion is rename all the linux-user
> local headers to target_syscall.h.

Hmmm, I didn't know if using the same name was on purpose or not. If the
intention was *not* to override the system's syscall.h, then a rename is the
proper solution.

Can you or someone else confirm this?

Thanks,
  Lluis

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] build: Add include check on syscall.h

[Peter Maydell]

On 29 January 2016 at 13:30, Lluís Vilanova  wrote:
> Peter Maydell writes:
>> Adding include guards is fine, but it sounds to me like what we
>> should actually do to fix this confusion is rename all the linux-user
>> local headers to target_syscall.h.
>
> Hmmm, I didn't know if using the same name was on purpose or not. If the
> intention was *not* to override the system's syscall.h, then a rename is the
> proper solution.


Yes, the intention is absolutely not to override any system header
(the constants defined are only relevant to the guest, and if the
header got included and overrode the host's syscall.h then nothing
would work and it probably wouldn't even compile). It just ended up
with the same name by accident.

thanks
-- PMM

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] build: Add include check on syscall.h

[Peter Maydell]

On 28 January 2016 at 20:36, Lluís Vilanova  wrote:
> The LTTng tracing backend includes the system's "syscall.h", but QEMU
> replaces it with its own for linux-user builds. This results in a double
> include on some targets (when LTTng is enabled).
>
> Signed-off-by: Lluís Vilanova 

Adding include guards is fine, but it sounds to me like what we
should actually do to fix this confusion is rename all the linux-user
local headers to target_syscall.h.

thanks
-- PMM