[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAhV-H6QxJH9y34326La4yFkz6AxUKPRYNkmkxhEe0i0S6QLyA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 12:43:39 +0800
From: Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>
To: Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site>
Cc: WANG Xuerui <kernel@...0n.name>, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] LoongArch: Remove posix_types.h include from sigcontext.h
On Wed, Aug 28, 2024 at 12:27 PM Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2024-08-28 at 12:11 +0800, Huacai Chen wrote:
> > Hi, Ruoyao,
> >
> > Just some questions:
> > 1, Changing UAPI is not a good idea.
>
> But removing unneeded includes from UAPI is fine. For example, the
> commit 44e0b165b6c078b84767da4ba06ffa27af562c96 has removed
> linux/posix_types.h from termbits.h for all ports.
Need more tests, not just kselftests.
Huacai
>
> > 2. In another thread you said that "paper over" is not enough for some
> > cases.
> > 3. include/uapi/linux/types.h still include linux/posix_types.h, why
> > your "paper over" works?
>
> Well maybe it does not work (I've not seriously tested as it's just a
> paper over). But removing unneeded include is correct on its own
> anyway. And ...
>
> > > The unneeded include was found debugging some vDSO self test build
> > > failure (it's not the root cause though).
>
> So it's just "found" debugging the issue. Maybe I should change "it's
> not the root cause" to "it's not really related to that issue"?
> >
>
> --
> Xi Ruoyao <xry111@...111.site>
> School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University
Powered by blists - more mailing lists