From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.190]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1743201270 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2025 09:26:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.190 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745313997; cv=none; b=SnkEXXMpFYkqQdO/HUconnBXVyApcFfLWrqGeRRWxWeVqsBOCJ2000J1nrqsHSi9PDyp0HLI6g1iV/krV7Pv1hjQ+yc/4uXsVAimGYkdjNjYDbSx1ywXpQE/tLv8jyi7IX0GHBFpblqm0Z6KWX6uMND7o0LiWjvGfSOVo2D7cww= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745313997; c=relaxed/simple; bh=jaFevAJjGyxewjfpMC+dQrgdwAOVmCC3Nqx9Yc6qTcA=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:References:In-Reply-To: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=eMkaNiYOK/BOTb392mZhH8opnBltV6MLtILAQ8zTvVctUEOu1CGOE2YTorwbGqRciaGIkX4nQmEbRf1/0ukfxLwYvifJuxa5XnkYE6nfdv7RAgQGhCiGL9+493jeBjtn5hSFT61a+NwhudwpE60wwHx5WJQFWdI79T0/pSt9S54= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.190 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.88.234]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4ZhcLJ5cl8z2TSBD; Tue, 22 Apr 2025 17:26:16 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemd100012.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.221.188.214]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 03EC4140296; Tue, 22 Apr 2025 17:26:32 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemd100011.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.204) by kwepemd100012.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.214) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1748.10; Tue, 22 Apr 2025 17:26:31 +0800 Received: from kwepemd100011.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.204]) by kwepemd100011.china.huawei.com ([7.221.188.204]) with mapi id 15.02.1748.010; Tue, 22 Apr 2025 17:26:31 +0800 From: duchangbin To: Ingo Molnar CC: duchangbin , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , "x86@kernel.org" , "H. Peter Anvin" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: remove orphan header file e820.h Thread-Topic: [PATCH] x86: remove orphan header file e820.h Thread-Index: AQHbsnPehTqp5R0IhUiNco+yC0Z+prOuvGyAgACv3IA= Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 09:26:31 +0000 Message-ID: <4f2c331fc758402fa662ad5bf4a2293c@huawei.com> References: <20250421041419.3167094-1-changbin.du@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-imapappendstamp: kwepemd100011.china.huawei.com (15.02.1748.010) x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Hi, Ingo, On Tue, Apr 22, 2025 at 08:56:49AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: >=20 > * Changbin Du wrote: >=20 > > The header arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/e820.h isn't used by any source fi= le any > > more. The e820 related items are defined in arch/x86/include/asm/e820/t= ypes.h. > > So clean it up. > >=20 > > Signed-off-by: Changbin Du > > --- > > arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/e820.h | 82 -------------------------------- > > 1 file changed, 82 deletions(-) > > delete mode 100644 arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/e820.h >=20 > This is part of the specification of the bootloader protocol between=20 > bootloaders and the Linux kernel and thus should not be removed. >=20 > The kernel has its internal types that adhere to the same=20 > specification, but that's not grounds to remove this header. > Regarding the e820 definitions used in the boot protocol, the main componen= ts involved are 'struct boot_params::e820_table' and the SETUP_E820_EXT node. = Both of these utilize the 'struct boot_e820_entry' defined in arch/x86/include/u= api/asm/setup_data.h, which is also part of the UAPI. The header arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/e820.h is not referenced by boot proto= col definitions. In this scenario, can the header file arch/x86/include/uapi/as= m/e820.h be safely removed? > Thanks, >=20 > Ingo >=20 --=20 Cheers, Changbin Du