linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] gpiolib: use the required minimum set of headers

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Z8IGduXgC3O74ipE@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 20:54:46 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: David Laight <david.laight.linux@...il.com>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] gpiolib: use the required minimum set of headers

On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 05:50:19PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Feb 2025 11:22:41 +0200
> Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:

...

> > > A 'fun' activity is to pick a random file add "#define _IOW xxx" at the
> > > top and see where ioctl.h is is first included from.
> > > (I've not got a build machine up at the moment.)
> > > 
> > > Then start fixing that include sequence.
> > > Moving a few headers around is otherwise pretty pointless.  
> > 
> > Have you tried to help with reviewing this?
> > 
> > https://lwn.net/ml/linux-kernel/YdIfz+LMewetSaEB@gmail.com/
> > 
> 
> Not seriously, though maybe I remember it.
> 
> 'dayjobs' makefile first deletes all the SUFFIX and builtin rules.
> Then it copies lots of headers from all over everywhere into a (fairly
> flat) obj/include tree to reduce the number of -Ipath to a minimum.
> A 'create' dependency is added to all the main targets to ensure the
> headers get copied (the .d files pick up updates).
> 
> It then generates explicit rules for each .o against its .c file.
> 
> Definitely speeds things up because make is no longer searching
> directories for all sorts of files that might be needed - but never are.
> 
> (I've not dug through the bowels of the kernel makefile, but probably
> have the skills to do so!)
> 
> But that is all different from solving the 'all the header files always
> get included' issue.

How? That gigantic series makes the headers cleaner in a sense to avoid
"include everything" thingy.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko