linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] mfd: intel-lpss: Move linux/pm.h to the local header

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:   Fri, 8 Feb 2019 14:59:58 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:     Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] mfd: intel-lpss: Move linux/pm.h to the local header

On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 03:08:17PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Feb 2019, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 11:50 AM Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 24 Jan 2019, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > >
> > > > We now using a common macro for PM operations in Intel LPSS driver,
> > > > and, since that macro relies on the definition and macro from linux/pm.h
> > > > header file, it's logical to include it directly in intel-lpss.h.
> > > > Otherwise it's a bit fragile and requires a proper ordering
> > > > of header inclusion in C files.
> > >
> > > I don't agree with this.  File which use various headers should
> > > explicitly include them.  Inheriting header files is non-optimal.
> > >
> > 
> > intel-lpss.h _is_ using pm.h.
> > I don't see a contradiction here.
> 
> Then it should be including in there *also*.

Why?

intel-lpss-*.c are not direct users of this header.

> My point is that if drivers/mfd/intel-lpss-{acpi,pci}.c use the header
> file, it should include it explicitly.

They are using it indirectly.

As far as I know we don't, for example, include "asm/*.h" to each of our C-file
because they are in _indirect_ use of.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko