From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.zeus03.de (zeus03.de [194.117.254.33]) (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 70A001F8691 for ; Tue, 17 Dec 2024 18:18:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.117.254.33 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1734459502; cv=none; b=Y8vA8+UxMWOZOw/cE0wPB2T5wxbGjrJwQUdlTBepD/E1t6huNNzNFJ50c2pcnd+zTc2K4rkDj+wXWhcLcMlTce8mwkJLPcyaTzv2DyaZ24pAo4/IuaUblkPtPh5JegV7j2pb4vXlDWTNFEJJKkiBt5vKhugztm/L7wH86mZKXAY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1734459502; c=relaxed/simple; bh=7z5UD01m+BMZRZdko2viTt+Edc9+VFcuJb9yDHIzrgk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ENhfo3sSKiITV/o4+4TmwHeoEm7vUxCra1TEUIiIzWVgcsA15KSh1Z5si6Zsg1ZQF3lZyq8a/ye44pw2V5EThz0UXmDTMFMYMX/AHUme/B6116jCI798b2Mjtvs9cv8Nl6z+igZFj8rnEOiGaaYzexj4Hy18ik1ptpnWMT3ITtM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sang-engineering.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sang-engineering.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sang-engineering.com header.i=@sang-engineering.com header.b=DlxnkylK; arc=none smtp.client-ip=194.117.254.33 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sang-engineering.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sang-engineering.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sang-engineering.com header.i=@sang-engineering.com header.b="DlxnkylK" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= sang-engineering.com; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=k1; bh=y9lH 6rj0++VWbw14s+yHgf4Y2V3DFMzP2Oa4flb5k0o=; b=DlxnkylKrScDpOtpacem sSZzh2U2rL9X+2Mnqmxth8WDbvATJvAr62gAQse0tGlQFnw+njIcbfA1xNoBy7Pg zqWq2ibHRkfCd3u54Dy1xR0g0sUFZPqRs6B5TPB847TePwmndkw7HFpesG2XehZR ODA1byktlaccsE/IQYvYwDnbggMPpCtpkjI38PfZNOyThy8b0k+giRLqezp/MLlR XQ6Y+hFYsPcX3npibQR73RTagAVhjQD/bKdOUYkYA9me4fUmpLN5zM8JmvLiv2/d uO9cg0k7uiITEGcASPqfUpwLJV/bQyWx5jpaPclmCZ7s7NEVMVUXX0VVPJ0CMln6 AA== Received: (qmail 4172729 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2024 19:18:11 +0100 Received: by mail.zeus03.de with ESMTPSA (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted, authenticated); 17 Dec 2024 19:18:11 +0100 X-UD-Smtp-Session: l3s3148p1@FwHfUXsp2rkujnsY Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2024 19:18:11 +0100 From: Wolfram Sang To: Sean Christopherson Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Yury Norov , Rasmus Villemoes Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: VMX: don't include '' directly Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Wolfram Sang , Sean Christopherson , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Yury Norov , Rasmus Villemoes References: <20241217070539.2433-2-wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="o97KPok2X6w3MXQH" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: --o97KPok2X6w3MXQH Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Hi Sean, > I definitely don't object to the KVM change, but the if y'all expect developers > to actually honor the "rule", it needs to have teeth. As evidenced by a similar > rule in arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h that also gets ignored, an #error that's > buried under an include guard and triggers on a macro that's never #undef'd is > quite useless. I went for the minimal change here. But if agreed, we could change bitmap.h to the pattern spinlock.h is using. Similar to your suggestion, yet with more readable names IMHO: #define __LINUX_INSIDE_SPINLOCK_H ... #undef __LINUX_INSIDE_SPINLOCK_H Happy hacking, Wolfram --o97KPok2X6w3MXQH Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEOZGx6rniZ1Gk92RdFA3kzBSgKbYFAmdhwF8ACgkQFA3kzBSg KbaosA/+IQZ34X/KeM5qWpQfbE/EOZqrjrnixGoL6kBfYn8LMjMLdRWMf42GuRYQ QTlQ/qPYma4fhV0bL5c27YSszvxQi85/SbvXnVSnDED75890loGGlfwDf/Wo5w5W 27gbogs8LEMBiw6Mtv8IN1aqRbw+Geg4jfo60cf684EwR4X79BZnjcUXBRec1jIJ /6Pv245ecFCn3Dca0gL2eI7ziTzkXzYHp4bAw+bNbc3pwLpaKUpci87OkwY32SXN XN9nMhrXzMGoTUK3Blqc4C6IGMWqJ7gaOFJmIcgGVM9u+/Oy8NCcGmxH/+l7K1im f10GdaHmaGkDv1H8Tt/mZ9WyuNV0rqi00BzdfSH/9b2Jb+KG0tNXNMIwxGzd/fpL ZKJIm1s7UGtHi+EvLKZ0adxRwmgTJRuP8OjiTtXAeBw1KYa09WhIEiWgWjcaIK2r +Mqicw1H0uAsVBEBavmI9tcO3sSjkmZmk50EtM4syk2+7EuUaTlwWT6teU5hzEyZ ioelFfQOGrjVnlrEx09UmDvGdwL/aMi5UG58cRvNYtve5jS82mX0iVEWFYsXYEzZ +LWoPPMmekqXzISO/QeT78cvw7v4dpp+hRbBLr8HsTD//deKJeI0zulFaXQKkKUm Yw2YbUiIA7cI+SUEyCR9/iadZuU6hsFguTNqHRN8J0QiAyRXn8E= =bo/a -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --o97KPok2X6w3MXQH--