linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 09/11] drivers/scsi: include <module.h> for modular ufshcd-pltfrm code

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: <1430487796.2192.2.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
Date:	Fri, 01 May 2015 06:43:16 -0700
From:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To:	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Vinayak Holikatti <vinholikatti@...il.com>,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] drivers/scsi: include <module.h> for modular
 ufshcd-pltfrm code

On Fri, 2015-05-01 at 09:37 -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> On 15-04-30 10:35 PM, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Thu, 2015-04-30 at 21:47 -0400, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
> >> This file is built off of a tristate Kconfig option and also contains
> >> modular function calls so it should explicitly include module.h to
> >> avoid compile breakage during header shuffles done in the future.
> > 
> > I don't understand your logic.  The ufs code made a design choice to
> > consolidate most headers for the hcd code in a local include (ufshcd.h),
> > which includes module.h, so why would they explicitly need it here as
> > well?  And if we follow your logic, why wouldn't they also need to
> > duplicate everything else (like the scsi includes)?
> 
> In my original build testing this file failed to compile once the
> modular code was moved from init.h to module.h as per the description
> in the 0/11.

Just as a point of principle, you didn't send the 0/11 patch, so I only
have this one to go by.

> Perhaps since that testing something else has changed.  I will drop this
> patch and retest and if it no longer fails, then great.

Sounds good.

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/