On 23.08.2022 12:24, Bertrand Marquis wrote: > --- a/tools/libacpi/mk_dsdt.c > +++ b/tools/libacpi/mk_dsdt.c > @@ -18,6 +18,16 @@ > #include <stdlib.h> > #include <stdbool.h> > #if defined(CONFIG_X86) > +/* > + * When building on non x86 host, arch-x86/xen.h will include xen.h which > will > + * try to include the arch xen.h (for example if built on arm, x86/xen.h will > + * include xen.h which will include arch-arm.h). > + * To prevent this effect, define x86 to have the proper sub arch included > when > + * the compiler does not define it. > + */ > +#if !(defined(__i386__) || defined(__x86_64__)) > +#define __x86_64__ > +#endif
Besides being confusing this depends on the order of checks in xen.h. > #include <xen/arch-x86/xen.h> > #include <xen/hvm/hvm_info_table.h> > #elif defined(CONFIG_ARM_64) At the very least you will want to #undef the auxiliary define as soon as practically possible. But I think a different solution will want finding. Did you check what the #include is needed for, really? I've glanced through the file without being able to spot anything ... After all this is a build tool, which generally can't correctly use many of the things declared in the header. > diff --git a/xen/include/public/arch-x86/xen.h > b/xen/include/public/arch-x86/xen.h > index 58a1e87ee971..ea33a56eb6a0 100644 > --- a/xen/include/public/arch-x86/xen.h > +++ b/xen/include/public/arch-x86/xen.h > @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ > * Copyright (c) 2004-2006, K A Fraser > */ > > +/* TODO: when cross building, this will include the wrong arch header */ > #include "../xen.h" I'm firmly against adding such a comment in a public header, the more that it's misleading: Cross-building of Xen, for example, works quite fine. The issue is limited to HOSTCC != CC (or yet more precisely the target architecture of each), afaict. Jan
