From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4458724BBE1; Wed, 5 Mar 2025 15:54:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.21 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741190068; cv=none; b=lPB0V0sAtdSlZaBttdqu4nHc2sEraU6QREkBg6Gd2huMjC+ahF8SuPsj0XPWVI7RxjELI1CSxFsIevgN28sVeDiVxkbz4TF6P2Ow9vArL7MQteyeMdYYSQecx+ThB6Q+17WZkfHaV8gopq502UpDzmVfZ/0rSkdQxzERbSi2Ia8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741190068; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4FO7zfHuqw52xFA6APgrJdJ15F1svGjafUi3DaGKuBs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=O1YMeTR5kOPBtAbG25hw3oyRabAXDWfd0iVPTYvo2M29fOSJ0UZWpT+mPMHFgFqaZgo8y3q35anbxae3cdJvnpNbm9FpY2Vr9yV+x4S2P4QqY5WW0ib84sUNs+ZHPu668Xw3nHOw6awJ0WMnpgrdZJ8N33tPoKBwo7SPyPOhvLc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=lx2+7Mpq; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.21 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="lx2+7Mpq" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1741190067; x=1772726067; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=4FO7zfHuqw52xFA6APgrJdJ15F1svGjafUi3DaGKuBs=; b=lx2+7MpqJiiXWsBFXPrvilT5Q5cePrhjUDZC8OrkM33p1MO0JUXS2lJO iwtqBdguPrmRt+OlkYQSlxCIhLJxXOv4Wao489dDQDomVbM+4BHgsk/k0 VOx4D/oV6Gy332JjOYYzs9ZaBJNvjsKwB1i70VjzYhu8DlFL4sGePYU6w 2r8I2y1ojUAYZ0he1YwsV22PI4GDSRDz2UbT93WzTdvl9qSwpgPu7o9xA /Kwdfm+n9k0a4EF4M8YQGG1Hwb5GYnn1tOxvH7hInb8jVAiyw+BwOiv20 fJ/v++VErXe6zNLIrdY/FrnJ7XZthropiJTleWNEaSudaPEQHyiRL1u6v Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: fbeVnfE5T4SPJJJAwWN/1w== X-CSE-MsgGUID: cSdQTTWyQxS211+BMzsQtA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11363"; a="42067650" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.14,223,1736841600"; d="scan'208";a="42067650" Received: from fmviesa008.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.148]) by orvoesa113.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Mar 2025 07:54:27 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: eof0d15zQsaIvluPb3OMvw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: yKMkLMEWT7u1PQVAEPXDoQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.14,223,1736841600"; d="scan'208";a="118890857" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.58]) by fmviesa008.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Mar 2025 07:54:24 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.98) (envelope-from ) id 1tpr4e-0000000HSKG-47Bm; Wed, 05 Mar 2025 17:54:20 +0200 Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2025 17:54:20 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Petr Mladek Cc: Tamir Duberstein , David Gow , Steven Rostedt , Rasmus Villemoes , Sergey Senozhatsky , Andrew Morton , Shuah Khan , Geert Uytterhoeven , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 4/4] scanf: break kunit into test cases Message-ID: References: <20250214-scanf-kunit-convert-v8-0-5ea50f95f83c@gmail.com> <20250214-scanf-kunit-convert-v8-4-5ea50f95f83c@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 04:01:48PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote: > On Fri 2025-02-14 11:20:01, Tamir Duberstein wrote: ... > > #include > > -#include > > -#include > > #include > > -#include > > -#include > > #include > > #include > > -#include > > +#include > > > > #define BUF_SIZE 1024 > > It would make more sense to do this clean up in the 3rd patch > where some code was replaced by the kunit macros. +1. > Also I am not sure about the choice. It might make sense to remove > because the pr_*() calls were removed. > But what about the others? Did anyone request the clean up, please? Header inclusions is a pain point to me in the kernel. Esp. misuse of kernel.h or other headers to behave like a "proxy". If no-one even asked for a cleanup it's always good to follow IWYU principle as you mentioned below. > I do not want to open a bike shadding because different people > have different opinion. > > I would personally prefer to keep the explicit includes when the > related API is still used. It helps to optimize nested includes > in the header files which helps to speedup build. AFAIK, there > are people working in this optimization and they might need > to revert this change. +1. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko