Re: [akpm-mm:mm-new 320/331] arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c:321:2: error: expected identifier

[Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>]

On Wed, 14 May 2025 16:39:11 +0200
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> Am 14.05.25 um 16:27 schrieb Claudio Imbrenda:
> > On Wed, 14 May 2025 14:48:44 +0100
> > Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> +cc s390 people, kvm s390 people + lists. sorry for noise but get_maintainers.pl
> >> says there's a lot of you :)
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 03:28:47PM +0200, Ignacio Moreno Gonzalez wrote:  
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> Due to the line:
> >>>
> >>> include/linux/huge_mm.h:509 '#include <uapi/asm/mman.h>'  
> >>
> >> BTW, I didn't notice at the time, but shouldn't this be linux/mman.h? You
> >> shouldn't be importing this header this way generally (only other users are arch
> >> code).
> >>
> >> But at any rate, you will ultimately import the PROT_NONE declaration.
> >>  
> >>>
> >>> there is a name collision in arch/s390/kvm/gaccess.c, where 'PROT_NONE' is also defined as value for 'enum prot_type'.  
> >>
> >> That is crazy. Been there since 2022 also...!
> >>  
> >>>
> >>> A possible fix for this would be to rename PROT_NONE in the enum to PROT_TYPE_NONE.  
> > 
> > please write a patch to rename PROT_NONE in our enum to
> > PROT_TYPE_DUMMY, I can review it quickly.
> > 
> > if Paolo has no objections, I'm fine with having the patch go through
> > the mm tree  
> 
> Yes, lets do a quick fix and I can also do
> Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
> 
> for a s/PROT_NONE/PROT_TYPE_NONE/g
> patch.

I'd rather have PROT_TYPE_DUMMY, since it's a dummy value and not
something that indicates "no protection"