linux-kernel - Re: dealing with excessive includes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20061023010812.GE25210@parisc-linux.org>
Date:	Sun, 22 Oct 2006 19:08:12 -0600
From:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
To:	Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>
Cc:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>,
	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel Development <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: dealing with excessive includes

On Mon, Oct 23, 2006 at 02:42:58AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
> > /*+
> >  * Provides: struct sched
> >  * Provides: total_forks, nr_threads, process_counts, nr_processes()
> >  * Provides: nr_running(), nr_uninterruptible(), nr_active(), nr_iowait(), weighted_cpuload()
> >  */
> 
> That's ugly.  If it needs that i don't think it's a good idea.
> We really want standard C, not some Linux dialect.

Um, that's a comment.  It's standard C.

> In theory it is even to do it automated without comments
> just based on the referenced symbols, except if stuff is hidden in macros 
> (but then the include defining the macro should have the right includes
> anyways). Another issue would be different name spaces - if there is both
> typedef foo and struct foo and nested local foo a script might have a little trouble 
> distingushing them, but i suspect that won't be a big issue.

Sorry, I assumed you'd've spent some time thinking about the problem.

Here's the problem.  If a file needs canonicalize_irq(), it should
include <linux/interrupt.h> (which eventually ends up including
asm/irq,h), and not <asm/irq.h> (where it's defined).
If a file needs add_wait_queue(), it should include <linux/wait.h>
(where it's defined) and not <linux/fs.h> (which directly includes
linux/wait.h>.

Please define an algorithm which distinguishes the two cases.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/