Hi, > On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 10:27:03PM +0200, Petr Vorel wrote: > > Hi Rich,
> > > On Thu, Oct 01, 2020 at 09:52:31PM +0200, Petr Vorel wrote: > > > > + update code where needed (include <linux/sysinfo.h> in code which > > > > included <linux/kernel.h> only to get struct sysinfo or SI_LOAD_SHIFT). > > > > The reason is to avoid indirect <linux/sysinfo.h> include when using > > > > some network headers: <linux/netlink.h> or others [1] -> > > > > <linux/kernel.h> -> <linux/sysinfo.h>. > > > > This indirect include causes redefinition of struct sysinfo when > > > > included both <sys/sysinfo.h> and some of network headers: > > > > In file included from > > > > x86_64-buildroot-linux-musl/sysroot/usr/include/linux/kernel.h:5, > > > > from > > > > x86_64-buildroot-linux-musl/sysroot/usr/include/linux/netlink.h:5, > > > > from ../include/tst_netlink.h:14, > > > > from tst_crypto.c:13: > > > > x86_64-buildroot-linux-musl/sysroot/usr/include/linux/sysinfo.h:8:8: > > > > error: redefinition of ‘struct sysinfo’ > > > > struct sysinfo { > > > > ^~~~~~~ > > > > In file included from ../include/tst_safe_macros.h:15, > > > > from ../include/tst_test.h:93, > > > > from tst_crypto.c:11: > > > > x86_64-buildroot-linux-musl/sysroot/usr/include/sys/sysinfo.h:10:8: > > > > note: originally defined here > > > > [1] or <linux/sysctl.h>, <linux/ethtool.h>, <linux/mroute6.h>, > > > > <linux/ethtool.h> > > > > Suggested-by: Rich Felker <dal...@aerifal.cx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Petr Vorel <petr.vo...@gmail.com> > > > > --- > > > > Hi, > > > > this looks to be long standing problem: python-psutil [2], iproute2 [3], > > > > even for glibc in the past [4] and it tried to be solved before [5]. > > > > This will require glibc fix after: > > > You can't do this; it breaks the existing contract with glibc. New > > > kernel headers can't force a glibc upgrade. > > Right, got that. > > > You just have to get rid > > > of use of <linux/kernel.h> elsewhere in the uapi headers. It was a > > > mistake that <linux/sysinfo.h> was ever separated out of > > > <linux/kernel.h> since it didn't (and couldn't) fix the contract that > > > <linux/kernel.h> exposes struct sysinfo (and that it's misnamed). But > > > it's no big deal. This can all be fixed without any breakage anywhere > > > just by not using it. > > Back to your original suggestion to move the alignment macros to a separate > > header. I was trying to avoid it not sure if introducing new header is > > acceptable, but we'll see. > Isn't there already another similar header with that type of macro > that they belong in? The only one I've found is const.h. Not sure it'd be better to move things there. Kind regards, Petr > Rich