linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] tracing: move tracing declarations from kernel.h to a dedicated 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]

Message-ID: <aSyertuRRX9Czvyz@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2025 21:44:46 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
	Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
	Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
	Tvrtko Ursulin <tursulin@...ulin.net>,
	Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@...e.com>,
	Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@...nel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] tracing: move tracing declarations from kernel.h to
 a dedicated header

On Sun, Nov 30, 2025 at 01:16:19PM -0500, Yury Norov wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2025 at 10:30:23PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 29, 2025 at 02:53:02PM -0500, Yury Norov (NVIDIA) wrote:
> > > Tracing is a half of the kernel.h in terms of LOCs, although it's a
> > > self-consistent part. Move it to a separate header.
> > > 
> > > This is a pure move, except for removing a few 'extern's.
> > 
> > Yeah, I also have something similar (but half-baked) locally, the Q I wanted to
> > ask is why a separate header? We have already some of tracing headers. Doesn't
> > suit well?
> 
> Just as said in the commit message - this part is more or less
> self-consistent and debugging-oriented. If someone needs to just
> throw trace_printk() in their driver, they will not have to pull
> all the heavy tracing machinery.

Please, add a summary of this to it. It will be much clearer and based on it
I agree with your judgement.

...

> > > --- a/include/linux/kernel.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/kernel.h
> > > @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
> > >  #include <linux/math.h>
> > >  #include <linux/minmax.h>
> > >  #include <linux/typecheck.h>
> > 
> > > +#include <linux/tracing.h>
> > 
> > There is better place for t*.h, i.e. after static_call_types.h.
> 
> They are poorly sorted for seemingly no good reason. I found the first
> t*.h and just put this header next to it. Don't think that placing it
> next to static_call_types.h is any better or worse.

It's better, because the (sparsed) chain of the sorted one is longer.

> > Btw, have you tried to sort alphabetically the bulk in the kernel.h after
> > your series. Does it still build? (Just wondering about state of affairs
> > with the possible cyclic dependencies.)
> 
> I didn't try. Sorting #include's is not the purpose of the series.

I know, I'm _just wondering_.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko