Re: [XEN PATCH 6/7] xen/x86: remove stale comment

[Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@bugseng.com>]

On 2023-12-04 17:40, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 04.12.2023 17:26, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>> On 2023-12-01 17:57, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>>> On 2023-11-30 17:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 29.11.2023 16:24, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>>>>> The comment referred to the declaration for do_mca, which
>>>>> now is part of hypercall-defs.h, therefore the comment is stale.
>>>> 
>>>> If the comments were stale, the #include-s should also be able to
>>>> disappear?
>> 
>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hypercall.h
>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hypercall.h
>>>>> @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
>>>>>  #include <xen/types.h>
>>>>>  #include <public/physdev.h>
>>>>>  #include <public/event_channel.h>
>>>>> -#include <public/arch-x86/xen-mca.h> /* for do_mca */
>>>>> +#include <public/arch-x86/xen-mca.h>
>>>>>  #include <asm/paging.h>
>>>> 
>>>> Here otoh I'm not even sure this public header (or the others) is
>>>> (are)
>>>> really needed.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I confirm this. It build even without this header.
>> 
>> It does appear to be needed after all. I did two differential pipeline
>> runs, and some jobs fail to compile when I remove the header (e.g.,
>> [1]). Looking trough the build log, it's not entirely clear what is 
>> the
>> relationship, but it seems related to some use of this struct defined 
>> in
>> xen-mca.h:
>> 
>> typedef struct xen_mc xen_mc_t;
>> DEFINE_XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(xen_mc_t);
> 
> That do_mca()'s parameter type, so in a way the comment is still 
> correct
> then.
> 
> Jan

Yeah, this patch can be dropped.

-- 
Nicola Vetrini, BSc
Software Engineer, BUGSENG srl (https://bugseng.com)