Re: [PATCH 3/3] tracing: move tracing declarations from kernel.h to a dedicated header

[david laight <david.laight@runbox.com>]

On Sun, 30 Nov 2025 21:44:46 +0200
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 30, 2025 at 01:16:19PM -0500, Yury Norov wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 29, 2025 at 10:30:23PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:  
> > > On Sat, Nov 29, 2025 at 02:53:02PM -0500, Yury Norov (NVIDIA) wrote:  
> > > > Tracing is a half of the kernel.h in terms of LOCs, although it's a
> > > > self-consistent part. Move it to a separate header.
> > > > 
> > > > This is a pure move, except for removing a few 'extern's.  
> > > 
> > > Yeah, I also have something similar (but half-baked) locally, the Q I wanted to
> > > ask is why a separate header? We have already some of tracing headers. Doesn't
> > > suit well?  
> > 
> > Just as said in the commit message - this part is more or less
> > self-consistent and debugging-oriented. If someone needs to just
> > throw trace_printk() in their driver, they will not have to pull
> > all the heavy tracing machinery.  
> 
> Please, add a summary of this to it. It will be much clearer and based on it
> I agree with your judgement.

It is worth checking whether the files get included anyway, and whether it
really makes that much difference.

Fiddling with kernel.h and extracting small 'leaf' headers from it is also
unlikely to make a big difference.

Try adding a syntax error to (say) sys/ioctl.h and see where it is included
from the first time - I suspect you'll be surprised.
Working on that include list might be more fruitful (in reducing build times).

	David