On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Stefani Seibold <stef...@seibold.net> wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, den 30.01.2014, 10:05 -0800 schrieb Andy Lutomirski:
>> On Thu, Jan 30, 2014 at 2:49 AM, <stef...@seibold.net> wrote:
>> > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/compat.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/compat.h
>> > index 59c6c40..45ba688 100644
>> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/compat.h
>> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/compat.h
>> > @@ -295,6 +295,10 @@ static inline compat_uptr_t ptr_to_compat(void __user
>> > *uptr)
>> >
>> > static inline void __user *arch_compat_alloc_user_space(long len)
>> > {
>> > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
>> > + struct pt_regs *regs = task_pt_regs(current);
>> > + return (void __user *)regs->sp - len;
>>
>> Is there some reason this doesn't need to be aligned?
>>
>
> The reason is that this function will not used for 32 bit kernels, but
> will the header will be included... This prevents an error!
Then why not just guard the whole function with an ifdef? Having a
piece of actual code that's not intended to be used (and might not
work) seems like a bad idea.
--Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
