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

["Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>]

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" <rpjday@crashcourse.ca>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@gmail.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  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_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
========================================================================