From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752767AbbC2Owa (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Mar 2015 10:52:30 -0400 Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com ([66.63.167.143]:51643 "EHLO bedivere.hansenpartnership.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752596AbbC2OwZ (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Mar 2015 10:52:25 -0400 Message-ID: <1427640740.25464.40.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 61/86] scsi/qla1280: use uapi/linux/pci_ids.h directly From: James Bottomley To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michael Reed , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 17:52:20 +0300 In-Reply-To: <20150329162830-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> References: <1427635734-24786-1-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <1427635734-24786-62-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <1427637816.25464.27.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <20150329162830-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.11 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2015-03-29 at 16:36 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 05:03:36PM +0300, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Sun, 2015-03-29 at 15:42 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > Header moved from linux/pci_ids.h to uapi/linux/pci_ids.h, > > > use the new header directly so we can drop > > > the wrapper in include/linux/pci_ids.h. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin > > > --- > > > drivers/scsi/qla1280.c | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c b/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c > > > index c68a66e..b2ada21 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c > > > +++ b/drivers/scsi/qla1280.c > > > @@ -348,7 +348,7 @@ > > > #include > > > #include > > > #include > > > -#include > > > +#include > > > > This is bogus, isn't it? There's a -Iuapi somewhere in the kernel > > compile line so the original include is still valid. Zorro does this: > > zorro_ids.h is exclusively in uapi but the include is still > > > > #include > > > > James > > > > > Hmm, that's true. I didn't know. A bunch of files pull in headers from uapi > explicitly, so I assumed it's a good idea. Do you think it's better to include > uapi files using short linux/.h, or the full uapi/linux/.h? Linux has a > mix of both. I prefer the short linux/.h because it's then up to the build system where they come from (we use the same scheme for asm-generic). If we hard code uapi/linux/.h they will be wrong again when we have a new API split. However, I'd say the rule I'd adhere to is that if nothing needs doing (i.e. whether they include linux/.h or uapi/linux/.h) then do nothing. It saves churning lots of files for no reason. James