[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrWni0aZ71r-R6oYG98kZvZA8a184UR0YURk_=tXu8HXMw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 11:37:47 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, james.morse@....com,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, lorenzo.pieralisi@....com,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, suzuki.poulose@....com,
Takahiro Akashi <takahiro.akashi@...aro.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/8] thread_info: allow custom in-task thread_info
On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 6:49 AM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote:
> Currently, task_struct is defined in <linux/sched.h>, which (indirectly)
> pulls in a number of low-level arch headers such as <asm/preempt.h>
> through a number of other headers. Thus, code and structures in these
> headers can't rely on the definition of task_struct. Some of these
> headers are necessary for the definition of task_struct, so moving
> task_struct into its own header is insufficient tio avoid circular
> includes.
The flippant answer is to fix the headers, but I tried that myself and
gave up :(
But how about this slightly less duplicative alternative:
struct thread_info {
#ifdef arch_thread_info
struct arch_thread_info arch_ti;
#endif
};
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
