linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] drivers/infiniband: Drop redundant includes of moduleparam.h

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: <adalk90zgwz.fsf@cisco.com>
Date:	Wed, 14 Nov 2007 12:54:52 -0800
From:	Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
To:	Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
Cc:	rolandd@...co.com, mshefty@...ips.intel.com, halr@...taire.com,
	openib-general@...nib.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] drivers/infiniband: Drop redundant includes of moduleparam.h

 > Drop #include <linux/moduleparam.h> in files that also include #include
 > <linux/module.h>.  module.h includes moduleparam.h already.

Do we want to make this sort of source code change?  I thought that
the consensus about the kernel was that we wanted to avoid relying of
implicit includes of <Y.h> by <X.h> -- in this case a better change
would actually seem to be to explicitly include moduleparam.h in files
using module parameters and then remove the include from module.h.

 - R.
-
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/