From: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
To: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
rolandd@cisco.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] missing includes from infiniband merge
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 22:35:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060924213508.GR29920@ftp.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060924205244.GA26774@uranus.ravnborg.org>
On Sun, Sep 24, 2006 at 10:52:44PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> The only thing I like to see is minimal suprise. And minimal suprise in
> this case is to be considered as "works on almost all archs if not all".
> In practical terms it could be that users of asm/* had to include
> baz.h before bar.h.
Even though dependency on baz.h is due to implementation of one of the
helpers in bar.h on a few targets and makes no sense whatsoever for
everything else?
> Or we could stick to current mess where one has
> to have a shitload of crosscompiles and CPU power to check even trivial
> changes to a few include files.
We _are_ stuck with it.
> Partly this could be fixed by making header files in asm-$(ARCH)
> second class citizen - that always got included via their linux/
> counterpart.
Which only makes dependency graph fatter... What's the difference
between including asm/uaccess.h and linux/uaccess.h?
Basically, you pull tons of includes into linux/blah.h because it
happens to include asm/foo.h and _that_ depends on having linux/barf.h
for $WEIRD_TARGET. And guess what? You are back to the same cross-compiles,
since attempt to remove blah.h -> barf.h will break $WEIRD_TARGET, but
you won't notice that unless you cross-compile for it.
So all you get is a bunch of harder to explain includes between linux/*.h,
_and_ extra dependencies that make no sense whatsoever.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-09-24 21:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-09-23 15:44 [PATCH] missing includes from infiniband merge Al Viro
2006-09-23 17:35 ` Roland Dreier
2006-09-23 20:29 ` Sam Ravnborg
2006-09-23 20:36 ` Al Viro
2006-09-23 20:54 ` Al Viro
2006-09-24 6:44 ` Sam Ravnborg
2006-09-24 19:19 ` Al Viro
2006-09-24 20:52 ` Sam Ravnborg
2006-09-24 21:35 ` Al Viro [this message]
2006-09-24 21:56 ` Sam Ravnborg
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=20060924213508.GR29920@ftp.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@ftp.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rolandd@cisco.com \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.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