linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/86] x86/gart: use uapi/linux/pci

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]

Date:	Tue, 31 Mar 2015 15:51:11 +0300
From:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/86] x86/gart: use uapi/linux/pci_ids.h directly

On Tue, 2015-03-31 at 13:04 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:51:06AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 10:34:45AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > * Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 07:29:36AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > * Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Header moved from linux/pci_ids.h to uapi/linux/pci_ids.h,
> > > > > > > use the new header directly so we can drop
> > > > > > > the wrapper in include/linux/pci_ids.h.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
> > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > >  arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c | 2 +-
> > > > > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c
> > > > > > > index 76164e1..3b52a56 100644
> > > > > > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c
> > > > > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c
> > > > > > > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
> > > > > > >  #include <linux/init.h>
> > > > > > >  #include <linux/memblock.h>
> > > > > > >  #include <linux/mmzone.h>
> > > > > > > -#include <linux/pci_ids.h>
> > > > > > > +#include <uapi/linux/pci_ids.h>
> > > > > > >  #include <linux/pci.h>
> > > > > > >  #include <linux/bitops.h>
> > > > > > >  #include <linux/suspend.h>
> > > > > > > -- 
> > > > > > > MST
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > NAK, it's absolutely ridiculous to send a 86 patches series for a 
> > > > > > trivial change like this!
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Just do the rename in a single patch and avoid the churn. Even if 
> > > > > > there are conflicts, they are utmost trivial to fix up.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > In fact the usual way to do such renames is to wait until the end of 
> > > > > > -rc1, auto-generate it and send Linus the core patch with the trivial 
> > > > > > renames straight away.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 	Ingo
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Unfortunately, vger mailing lists reject any email with more than 2k of
> > > > > email headers.  This means if I do what you suggest I can't Cc all
> > > > > maintainers for all affected files. [...]
> > > > 
> > > > You can Cc: linux-arch and lkml for tree-wide changes.
> > > > 
> > > > Also, since it's mostly trivial, there shouldn't be much (if any) 
> > > > controversy about it, right?
> > > 
> > > I thought so, too. However, I was just proven wrong and the patchset 
> > > was nacked. [...]
> > 
> > Well, I only NAK-ed its high-churn presentation, not the essence of it 
> > which looks good to me.
> 
> Thanks! Another concern voiced was whether it's better to include uapi
> files using #include <uapi/linux/foo.h> or #include <linux/foo.h>.  Both
> work - I thought #include <uapi/linux/foo.h> makes it easier to figure
> out where the file is. James Bottomley (Cc'd) thought it's not worth the code
> churn however, since if we ever add a file under linux/foo.h we'd need
> to change users back.  He also noted that many headers are referenced
> without the uapi/ prefix, if making the change, we'd have to change
> them all.
> 
> OTOH if not, maybe we want to drop all '#include <uapi/linux/foo.h>'
> converting them to '#include <linux/foo.h>' (and same for asm),
> except where it's linux/foo.h pulling in uapi/linux/foo.h.
> That, at least, would make it all consistent.

I've got to say I strongly prefer just using #include <linux/foo.h>
because it mirrors the scheme we use for #include <asm/bar.h>.  It's not
just about code churn, it's also about reducing confusion: people might
get confused about whether they should include the file that exists in
asm rather than leaving the compile to generate it.

James


--
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/