linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] iio: st_sensors: Remove some redundant includes in st

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: <1d367f33-3ed2-63d0-093a-7d1f561cca10@wanadoo.fr>
Date:   Mon, 19 Jun 2023 22:02:37 +0200
From:   Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc:     Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] iio: st_sensors: Remove some redundant includes in
 st_sensors.h

Le 17/06/2023 à 20:49, Jonathan Cameron a écrit :
> On Mon, 12 Jun 2023 22:13:37 +0200
> Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr> wrote:
> 
>> There is no need to include i2c.h and spi/spi.h in st_sensors.h.
>> Should it be needed, st_sensors_(i2c|spi).h should be used.
> Agreed these should be dropped from here.
> 
> But I don't agree with statement that i2c.h and spi/spi.h should
> be gotten implicitly from st_sensors_i2c.h / st_sensors_spi.h
> If they are needed the should be included directly in the files
> where they are needed.
> 
> Jonathan

Another option I thought about was to:
    - keep the includes in st_sensors.h

    - move function declaration in st_sensors.h
int st_sensors_spi_configure(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
			     struct spi_device *spi);
and
int st_sensors_i2c_configure(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
			     struct i2c_client *client);

    - remove st_sensors_spi.h and st_sensors_i2c.h

At least, it would simplify things a remove 2 mostly useless .h file.

It would not give the benefit of removing some include for files that do 
not require spi.h or i2c.h, but as these includes are already there, it 
wouldn't make things worst :)

What do you think of this approach?

CJ

> 
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
>> ---
>> Based on one of my script, this reduces the number of included files from
>> 573 files to 515 files when compiling drivers/iio/accel/st_accel_buffer.c
>> ---
>>   include/linux/iio/common/st_sensors.h | 2 --
>>   1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/iio/common/st_sensors.h b/include/linux/iio/common/st_sensors.h
>> index 607c3a89a647..a1d3d57d6d6e 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/iio/common/st_sensors.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/iio/common/st_sensors.h
>> @@ -10,8 +10,6 @@
>>   #ifndef ST_SENSORS_H
>>   #define ST_SENSORS_H
>>   
>> -#include <linux/i2c.h>
>> -#include <linux/spi/spi.h>
>>   #include <linux/irqreturn.h>
>>   #include <linux/iio/iio.h>
>>   #include <linux/iio/trigger.h>
> 
>