From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
To: "Jürgen Groß" <jgross@suse.com>,
"Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
x86@kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] x86/msr: Remove duplicate #include
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2026 10:42:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0037f910-2fee-4088-8ebd-c8a614f246b9@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5bd029fe-35ee-4bbc-8e05-0df8c4125b6a@suse.com>
On 4/30/26 00:20, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> On 29.04.26 20:45, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
>>
>> errno.h is already included for C code at the top of the header.
>
> I'm seeing only asm/errno.h being included.
>
> I don't say linux/errno.h is needed, but the reasoning is not really
> convincing.
Yes, completely agree. I goofed that one was linux/errno.h and the other
was asm/errno.h. So the reasoning was bogus. But I do think it's still a
good idea for other reasons. How about:
linux/errno.h was presumably being included here for some of
the MSR function implementations inside the #fidef. But, even
before those were moved out of the #ifdef, they were not using
anything from errno.h. There does not appear to be any reason to
include it here. Especially inside the (quite small now) #ifdef.
Remove the #include.
?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-30 17:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-29 18:45 [PATCH v2 0/8] x86/msr: Consolidate native/paravirt MSR functions Dave Hansen
2026-04-29 18:45 ` [PATCH v2 1/8] x86/msr: Use paravirt "calls" in common code Dave Hansen
2026-04-29 18:45 ` [PATCH v2 2/8] x86/msr: Consolidate rdmsr() definitions Dave Hansen
2026-04-29 18:45 ` [PATCH v2 3/8] x86/msr: Consolidate rdmsr_safe() implementations Dave Hansen
2026-04-30 19:43 ` Maciej Wieczor-Retman
2026-04-29 18:45 ` [PATCH v2 4/8] x86/msr: Consolidate rdmsrq() implementations Dave Hansen
2026-04-29 18:45 ` [PATCH v2 5/8] x86/msr: Consolidate {rd,wr}msr[q]_safe() implementations Dave Hansen
2026-04-29 18:45 ` [PATCH v2 6/8] x86/msr: Consolidate rdpmc() implementations Dave Hansen
2026-04-29 18:45 ` [PATCH v2 7/8] x86/msr: Remove old crusty comment Dave Hansen
2026-04-29 18:45 ` [PATCH v2 8/8] x86/msr: Remove duplicate #include Dave Hansen
2026-04-30 7:20 ` Jürgen Groß
2026-04-30 17:42 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2026-04-30 19:22 ` Jürgen Groß
2026-04-30 7:21 ` [PATCH v2 0/8] x86/msr: Consolidate native/paravirt MSR functions Jürgen Groß
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=0037f910-2fee-4088-8ebd-c8a614f246b9@intel.com \
--to=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox