Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1230065 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-09-22 12:50 +0200 |
| Last post | 2015-09-24 04:10 +0200 |
| Articles | 9 — 4 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
[PATCH 0/2] selftests/userfaultfd: fix build Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> - 2015-09-22 12:50 +0200
[PATCH 1/2] userfaultfd: remove kernel header include from uapi header Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> - 2015-09-22 12:50 +0200
[PATCH 2/2] selftests/userfaultfd: improve syscall number definition Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> - 2015-09-22 12:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/userfaultfd: improve syscall number definition Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com> - 2015-09-22 15:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/userfaultfd: improve syscall number definition Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com> - 2015-09-22 16:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/userfaultfd: improve syscall number definition Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> - 2015-09-22 19:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/userfaultfd: improve syscall number definition Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> - 2015-09-23 12:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/userfaultfd: improve syscall number definition Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> - 2015-09-23 15:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/userfaultfd: improve syscall number definition Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> - 2015-09-24 04:10 +0200
| From | Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-22 12:50 +0200 |
| Subject | [PATCH 0/2] selftests/userfaultfd: fix build |
| Message-ID | <qbtj3-2Wc-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
These two patches fix building the userfaultfd test tool for me. The first patch fixes a build error I experienced by removing a kernel header from an uapi header file. The second fix adds the syscall numbers for other architectures, fixes a typo and makes the whole syscall numbering more future-proof. Tested on x86, arm and arm64. Andre Przywara (2): userfaultfd: remove kernel header include from uapi header selftests/userfaultfd: improve syscall number definition include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h | 2 -- tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 13 ++++++++++++- 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) -- 2.5.1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-22 12:50 +0200 |
| Subject | [PATCH 1/2] userfaultfd: remove kernel header include from uapi header |
| Message-ID | <qbtj4-2Wc-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1230065 |
As include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h is a user visible header file, it should not include kernel-exclusive header files. So trying to build the userfaultfd test program from the selftests directory fails, since it contains a reference to linux/compiler.h. As it turns out, that header is not really needed there, so we can simply remove it to fix that issue. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> --- include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h | 2 -- 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h b/include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h index df0e09b..9057d7a 100644 --- a/include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h +++ b/include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h @@ -11,8 +11,6 @@ #include <linux/types.h> -#include <linux/compiler.h> - #define UFFD_API ((__u64)0xAA) /* * After implementing the respective features it will become: -- 2.5.1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-22 12:50 +0200 |
| Subject | [PATCH 2/2] selftests/userfaultfd: improve syscall number definition |
| Message-ID | <qbtj4-2Wc-23@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1230065 |
At the moment the userfaultfd test program only supports x86 and an architecture called "powewrpc" ;-) Fix that typo and add the syscall numbers for other architectures as well. Also as in an ideal world a syscall number should come from the system header file <asm/unistd.h>, include that header and guard the explicit syscall number section below to avoid redefinitions. Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> --- tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 13 ++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c index 2c7cca6..63be27f 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c @@ -65,16 +65,27 @@ #include <sys/ioctl.h> #include <pthread.h> #include "../../../../include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h" +#include <asm/unistd.h> +/* ideally the above user header provides that number, but ... */ +#ifndef __NR_userfaultfd #ifdef __x86_64__ #define __NR_userfaultfd 323 #elif defined(__i386__) #define __NR_userfaultfd 374 -#elif defined(__powewrpc__) +#elif defined(__powerpc__) #define __NR_userfaultfd 364 +#elif defined(__ia64__) +#define __NR_userfaultfd 1343 +#elif defined(__arm__) +#define __NR_userfaultfd 388 +#elif defined(__aarch64__) +/* this is from the generic syscall table, used also on other architectures */ +#define __NR_userfaultfd 283 #else #error "missing __NR_userfaultfd definition" #endif +#endif /* !__NR_userfaultfd */ static unsigned long nr_cpus, nr_pages, nr_pages_per_cpu, page_size; -- 2.5.1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-22 15:50 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/userfaultfd: improve syscall number definition |
| Message-ID | <qbw7g-6Xg-27@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1230070 |
On 09/22/2015 04:45 AM, Andre Przywara wrote: > At the moment the userfaultfd test program only supports x86 and an > architecture called "powewrpc" ;-) > Fix that typo and add the syscall numbers for other architectures as > well. > Also as in an ideal world a syscall number should come from the system > header file <asm/unistd.h>, include that header and guard the explicit > syscall number section below to avoid redefinitions. > > Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> > --- > tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 13 ++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c > index 2c7cca6..63be27f 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c > @@ -65,16 +65,27 @@ > #include <sys/ioctl.h> > #include <pthread.h> > #include "../../../../include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h" > +#include <asm/unistd.h> > > +/* ideally the above user header provides that number, but ... */ > +#ifndef __NR_userfaultfd > #ifdef __x86_64__ > #define __NR_userfaultfd 323 > #elif defined(__i386__) > #define __NR_userfaultfd 374 > -#elif defined(__powewrpc__) > +#elif defined(__powerpc__) > #define __NR_userfaultfd 364 > +#elif defined(__ia64__) > +#define __NR_userfaultfd 1343 > +#elif defined(__arm__) > +#define __NR_userfaultfd 388 > +#elif defined(__aarch64__) > +/* this is from the generic syscall table, used also on other architectures */ > +#define __NR_userfaultfd 283 > #else > #error "missing __NR_userfaultfd definition" > #endif > +#endif /* !__NR_userfaultfd */ > > static unsigned long nr_cpus, nr_pages, nr_pages_per_cpu, page_size; > > This is not okay. User-space shouldn't be (re)defining/duplicating syscall numbers. I can't take this patch. thanks, -- Shuah -- Shuah Khan Sr. Linux Kernel Developer Open Source Innovation Group Samsung Research America (Silicon Valley) shuahkh@osg.samsung.com | (970) 217-8978 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-22 16:10 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/userfaultfd: improve syscall number definition |
| Message-ID | <qbwqC-7yX-23@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1230224 |
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 07:49:13AM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 09/22/2015 04:45 AM, Andre Przywara wrote: > > At the moment the userfaultfd test program only supports x86 and an > > architecture called "powewrpc" ;-) > > Fix that typo and add the syscall numbers for other architectures as > > well. > > Also as in an ideal world a syscall number should come from the system > > header file <asm/unistd.h>, include that header and guard the explicit > > syscall number section below to avoid redefinitions. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> > > --- > > tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 13 ++++++++++++- > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c > > index 2c7cca6..63be27f 100644 > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c > > @@ -65,16 +65,27 @@ > > #include <sys/ioctl.h> > > #include <pthread.h> > > #include "../../../../include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h" > > +#include <asm/unistd.h> > > > > +/* ideally the above user header provides that number, but ... */ > > +#ifndef __NR_userfaultfd > > #ifdef __x86_64__ > > #define __NR_userfaultfd 323 > > #elif defined(__i386__) > > #define __NR_userfaultfd 374 > > -#elif defined(__powewrpc__) > > +#elif defined(__powerpc__) > > #define __NR_userfaultfd 364 > > +#elif defined(__ia64__) > > +#define __NR_userfaultfd 1343 > > +#elif defined(__arm__) > > +#define __NR_userfaultfd 388 > > +#elif defined(__aarch64__) > > +/* this is from the generic syscall table, used also on other architectures */ > > +#define __NR_userfaultfd 283 > > #else > > #error "missing __NR_userfaultfd definition" > > #endif > > +#endif /* !__NR_userfaultfd */ > > > > static unsigned long nr_cpus, nr_pages, nr_pages_per_cpu, page_size; > > > > > > This is not okay. User-space shouldn't be (re)defining/duplicating > syscall numbers. I can't take this patch. -mm has already been updated to do exactly that. Syscall numbers end up hardcoded into userland binaries/libs somewhere, so it's not a bugfix but certainly it's a nice cleanup to remove the whole #ifdef block. Andre, could you see if linux-next (which includes -mm) works for you by just running "cd tools/testing/selftests/vm/ && make"? If there's any further change required could you diff it against linux-next? Thanks! Andrea -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-22 19:20 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/userfaultfd: improve syscall number definition |
| Message-ID | <qbzou-3mH-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1230241 |
Hi Shuah, Andrea, On 22/09/15 15:06, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 07:49:13AM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: >> On 09/22/2015 04:45 AM, Andre Przywara wrote: >>> At the moment the userfaultfd test program only supports x86 and an >>> architecture called "powewrpc" ;-) >>> Fix that typo and add the syscall numbers for other architectures as >>> well. >>> Also as in an ideal world a syscall number should come from the system >>> header file <asm/unistd.h>, include that header and guard the explicit >>> syscall number section below to avoid redefinitions. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> >>> --- >>> tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c | 13 ++++++++++++- >>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c >>> index 2c7cca6..63be27f 100644 >>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c >>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd.c >>> @@ -65,16 +65,27 @@ >>> #include <sys/ioctl.h> >>> #include <pthread.h> >>> #include "../../../../include/uapi/linux/userfaultfd.h" >>> +#include <asm/unistd.h> >>> >>> +/* ideally the above user header provides that number, but ... */ >>> +#ifndef __NR_userfaultfd >>> #ifdef __x86_64__ >>> #define __NR_userfaultfd 323 >>> #elif defined(__i386__) >>> #define __NR_userfaultfd 374 >>> -#elif defined(__powewrpc__) >>> +#elif defined(__powerpc__) >>> #define __NR_userfaultfd 364 >>> +#elif defined(__ia64__) >>> +#define __NR_userfaultfd 1343 >>> +#elif defined(__arm__) >>> +#define __NR_userfaultfd 388 >>> +#elif defined(__aarch64__) >>> +/* this is from the generic syscall table, used also on other architectures */ >>> +#define __NR_userfaultfd 283 >>> #else >>> #error "missing __NR_userfaultfd definition" >>> #endif >>> +#endif /* !__NR_userfaultfd */ >>> >>> static unsigned long nr_cpus, nr_pages, nr_pages_per_cpu, page_size; >>> >>> >> >> This is not okay. User-space shouldn't be (re)defining/duplicating >> syscall numbers. I can't take this patch. While I agree that this isn't the right approach from a userland point of view, I wonder how this is supposed to work for the next few months? Is everybody required to overwrite their distribution-provided kernel headers just for compiling this test program? > -mm has already been updated to do exactly that. Syscall numbers end > up hardcoded into userland binaries/libs somewhere, so it's not a > bugfix but certainly it's a nice cleanup to remove the whole #ifdef block. > > Andre, could you see if linux-next (which includes -mm) works for you > by just running "cd tools/testing/selftests/vm/ && make"? If there's > any further change required could you diff it against linux-next? This doesn't compile now for me, because it looks into /usr/include/asm/unistd.h, which I keep to the distribution copy of it. Also linux/userfaultfd.h is missing, because it's brand new. If that tool lives in the kernel repo, it should be able to either use the uapi headers directly or hardcode the syscall numbers - strictly it's not a sane userland program anymore, but for that kind of tools I deem it's totally acceptable. I think this is one rationale for keeping it inside the linux.git repo. Obviously you were facing the same problem in the beginning (looking at the original code), so I was just extending the original solution to cover more architectures and prepare for the time when those symbols start to appear in distributions. I guess the right solution would be to hack the Makefile to set the include path to the kernel's copy of include/uapi, though I am not sure this works cleanly for different architectures and separate build directories. I will give this a try ... Cheers, Andre. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 12:00 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/userfaultfd: improve syscall number definition |
| Message-ID | <qbP0d-yp-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1230515 |
On Tue, 2015-09-22 at 18:15 +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: > On 22/09/15 15:06, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: > > Andre, could you see if linux-next (which includes -mm) works for you > > by just running "cd tools/testing/selftests/vm/ && make"? If there's > > any further change required could you diff it against linux-next? > > This doesn't compile now for me, because it looks into > /usr/include/asm/unistd.h, which I keep to the distribution copy of it. > Also linux/userfaultfd.h is missing, because it's brand new. ... > I guess the right solution would be to hack the Makefile to set the > include path to the kernel's copy of include/uapi, though I am not sure > this works cleanly for different architectures and separate build > directories. I will give this a try ... Not that's not the right solution. The right solution is to export the kernel headers, the Makefile will pick them up (at least in linux-next): $ cd linux $ make headers_install $ ls usr/include/ asm/ asm-generic/ drm/ linux/ misc/ mtd/ rdma/ scsi/ sound/ uapi/ video/ xen/ $ make -C tools/testing/selftests TARGETS=vm ... $ ls tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd* cheers -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-23 15:20 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/userfaultfd: improve syscall number definition |
| Message-ID | <qbS7L-5di-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1231297 |
Hi Michael, On 23/09/15 10:55, Michael Ellerman wrote: > On Tue, 2015-09-22 at 18:15 +0100, Andre Przywara wrote: >> On 22/09/15 15:06, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: >>> Andre, could you see if linux-next (which includes -mm) works for you >>> by just running "cd tools/testing/selftests/vm/ && make"? If there's >>> any further change required could you diff it against linux-next? >> >> This doesn't compile now for me, because it looks into >> /usr/include/asm/unistd.h, which I keep to the distribution copy of it. >> Also linux/userfaultfd.h is missing, because it's brand new. > ... >> I guess the right solution would be to hack the Makefile to set the >> include path to the kernel's copy of include/uapi, though I am not sure >> this works cleanly for different architectures and separate build >> directories. I will give this a try ... > > Not that's not the right solution. > > The right solution is to export the kernel headers, the Makefile will pick them > up (at least in linux-next): Actually that was I was hoping for, I just missed the possibility of headers_install to put the files back into the kernel tree (I usually use it with INSTALL_HDR_PATH for packaging). > > $ cd linux > $ make headers_install > $ ls usr/include/ > asm/ asm-generic/ drm/ linux/ misc/ mtd/ rdma/ scsi/ sound/ uapi/ video/ xen/ > $ make -C tools/testing/selftests TARGETS=vm > ... > $ ls tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd > tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd* Yes, that works. Now I have just to figure out how to arrange this with out-of-tree build directories. Cheers, Andre. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-24 04:10 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] selftests/userfaultfd: improve syscall number definition |
| Message-ID | <qc48V-5Uv-17@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1231432 |
On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 14:11 +0100, Andre Przywara wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> On 23/09/15 10:55, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-09-22 at 18:15 +0100, Andre Przywara wrote:
> >> On 22/09/15 15:06, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> >>> Andre, could you see if linux-next (which includes -mm) works for you
> >>> by just running "cd tools/testing/selftests/vm/ && make"? If there's
> >>> any further change required could you diff it against linux-next?
> >>
> >> This doesn't compile now for me, because it looks into
> >> /usr/include/asm/unistd.h, which I keep to the distribution copy of it.
> >> Also linux/userfaultfd.h is missing, because it's brand new.
> > ...
> >> I guess the right solution would be to hack the Makefile to set the
> >> include path to the kernel's copy of include/uapi, though I am not sure
> >> this works cleanly for different architectures and separate build
> >> directories. I will give this a try ...
> >
> > Not that's not the right solution.
> >
> > The right solution is to export the kernel headers, the Makefile will pick them
> > up (at least in linux-next):
>
> Actually that was I was hoping for, I just missed the possibility of
> headers_install to put the files back into the kernel tree (I usually
> use it with INSTALL_HDR_PATH for packaging).
OK great.
It does seem that folks are struggling to work out how to do this, so maybe we
can come up with a way to have it automated.
> > $ cd linux
> > $ make headers_install
> > $ ls usr/include/
> > asm/ asm-generic/ drm/ linux/ misc/ mtd/ rdma/ scsi/ sound/ uapi/ video/ xen/
> > $ make -C tools/testing/selftests TARGETS=vm
> > ...
> > $ ls tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd
> > tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd*
>
> Yes, that works. Now I have just to figure out how to arrange this with
> out-of-tree build directories.
Right, I think it doesn't work at the moment.
The makefiles that look for the kernel headers use ../../../../usr/include,
which probably isn't what you want for an out of tree build.
Maybe we should do something like the below.
It allows you to do:
$ make O=~/work/build/ headers_install
$ ls ~/work/build/usr/include/
asm/ asm-generic/ drm/ linux/ misc/ mtd/ rdma/ scsi/ sound/ uapi/ video/ xen/
$ ls usr/include
ls: cannot access usr/include: No such file or directory
$ make -C tools/testing/selftests KERNEL_HEADERS=~/work/build/usr/include/ TARGEST=vm
$ ls tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd
tools/testing/selftests/vm/userfaultfd*
cheers
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/Makefile
index 8922c2155a47..617a76be3889 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/Makefile
@@ -41,6 +41,9 @@ override LDFLAGS =
override MAKEFLAGS =
endif
+KERNEL_HEADERS ?= $(abspath ../../../usr/include)
+export KERNEL_HEADERS
+
all:
for TARGET in $(TARGETS); do \
make -C $$TARGET; \
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/Makefile
index e4bb1de1d526..4f45b9c8dd75 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/vm/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/vm/Makefile
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
# Makefile for vm selftests
-CFLAGS = -Wall -I ../../../../usr/include $(EXTRA_CFLAGS)
+CFLAGS = -Wall -I $(KERNEL_HEADERS) $(EXTRA_CFLAGS)
BINARIES = compaction_test
BINARIES += hugepage-mmap
BINARIES += hugepage-shm
@@ -14,12 +14,9 @@ BINARIES += userfaultfd
all: $(BINARIES)
%: %.c
$(CC) $(CFLAGS) -o $@ $^ -lrt
-userfaultfd: userfaultfd.c ../../../../usr/include/linux/kernel.h
+userfaultfd: userfaultfd.c $(KERNEL_HEADERS)/linux/kernel.h
$(CC) $(CFLAGS) -O2 -o $@ $< -lpthread
-../../../../usr/include/linux/kernel.h:
- make -C ../../../.. headers_install
-
TEST_PROGS := run_vmtests
TEST_FILES := $(BINARIES)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web