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: <aS0CgnvRfQtam0uU@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2025 04:50:42 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: david laight <david.laight@...box.com>
Cc: Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>, 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 11:09:25PM +0000, david laight wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Nov 2025 21:44:46 +0200
> Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:

...

> It is worth checking whether the files get included anyway, and whether it
> really makes that much difference.
> 
> Fiddling with kernel.h and extracting small 'leaf' headers from it is also
> unlikely to make a big difference.

It makes a big difference for the kernel.h and its (ab)users.
Especially when we have cyclic dependencies and "include everything"
cases due to other _headers_ including kernel.h.

> Try adding a syntax error to (say) sys/ioctl.h and see where it is included
> from the first time - I suspect you'll be surprised.
> Working on that include list might be more fruitful (in reducing build times).

kernel.h elimination (in the form it exists right now) is very fruitful.
However, you may help with the (say) ioctl.h or whatever you consider
really fruitful, we all will thank you (no jokes).

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko