netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] nfc: mrvl: Don't use "proxy" 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20241103081740.7bc006c1@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2024 08:17:40 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Krzysztof
 Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] nfc: mrvl: Don't use "proxy" headers

On Fri,  1 Nov 2024 10:39:10 +0200 Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> Subject: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] nfc: mrvl: Don't use "proxy" headers

What is a "proxy" header? Guessing by the two patches you posted - 
are you trying to get rid of of_gpio.h?

> Update header inclusions to follow IWYU (Include What You Use)
> principle.

I'm definitely on board with cleaning this up, but would prefer
to make sure we can validate new patches against introducing
regressions. Otherwise the stream of patches will be never ending.
What tooling do you use? Is it easy to integrate into a CI system?