linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regmap: introduce regmap_name to fix syscon regmap trace events

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: <1425894502.3152.12.camel@pengutronix.de>
Date:	Mon, 09 Mar 2015 10:48:22 +0100
From:	Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	kernel@...gutronix.de, Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@...sung.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regmap: introduce regmap_name to fix syscon regmap
 trace events

Am Samstag, den 07.03.2015, 10:57 +0000 schrieb Mark Brown:
> On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 03:16:55PM +0100, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> 
> >  #include <linux/sort.h>
> > -#include <trace/events/regmap.h>
> >  
> >  #include "internal.h"
> >  
> > +#include <trace/events/regmap.h>
> > +
> 
> The change is basically OK but the above is a bit too funky for my
> taste - it feels like it's asking for annoying compile breakage if
> anyone changes anything. I'd be more inclined to move the header
> somewhere where the events stuff can see it than do this.

Good point. As I see it I have three possiblities now:

a) Just #include "../../../drivers/base/regmap/internal.h" in
   include/trace/events/regmap.h

b) Move drivers/base/regmap/internal.h to
   include/linux/regmap-internal.h and
   #include <linux/regmap-internal.h> in include/trace/events/regmap.h

c) Move include/trace/events/regmap.h to drivers/base/regmap/trace.h
   and just #include "internal.h" in drivers/base/regmap/trace.h

Which, if any, of these options would you prefer? Here is an
unscientific survey:

a) $ git grep "#include \"\.\." include/
   include/linux/libfdt.h:#include "../../scripts/dtc/libfdt/fdt.h"
   include/linux/libfdt.h:#include "../../scripts/dtc/libfdt/libfdt.h"
   include/xen/interface/io/vscsiif.h:#include "../grant_table.h"

b) $ find include/ -name "*internal.h"
   include/linux/timekeeper_internal.h

c) $ find drivers/ -name trace.h
   drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/trace.h
   drivers/net/wireless/ath/trace.h
   drivers/net/wireless/ath/wil6210/trace.h
   drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath5k/trace.h
   drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath6kl/trace.h
   drivers/usb/dwc3/trace.h
   drivers/misc/cxl/trace.h

a) and b) aren't very common, and c) is mostly used by driver-level, not
subsystem-level trace events.

regards
Philipp

--
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/