Re: [PATCH v4 01/15] x86/msr: Add missing includes of

Xin Li
2025-04-30T17:36:12Z

On 4/30/2025 2:17 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> While this is not my subsystem so don't have the final say here, you had
> to explain quite much to prove that (and reviewer would have to go through
> the same places to check). Wouldn't it be much simpler for all if all
> those .c files would just include <asm/msr.h> directly? No need to explain
> anything then.
>
> Also, similar to what you're doing for some tsc related things in this
> series, somebody could in the future decide that hey, these static inline
> functions (that use .*msr.*) belong to some other file, allowing msr.h to
> be removed from arch/x86/events/perf_event.h. Again, we'd need to add
> asm/msr.h into more .c files. This is the problem with relying on indirect
> includes, they create hard to track dependencies for #includes done in .h
> files. If we actively encourage to depend on indirect #include
> dependencies like that, it makes it very hard to_remove_ any #include
> from a header file (as you have yourself discovered).

You're right, it makes a lot of sense from maintenance point of view.