Re: [PATCH v8 2/5] perf config: Bring declarations about config from util/cache.h to util/config.h

[Taeung Song <taeung.dev@gmail.com>]

Hi,

I have a question about header files.

I'm cleaning up source files that used cache.h
after moving codes about config from cache.h to config.h.

But I found there are header files that are repeatedly declared over all.

For example, builtin-report.c include util/sort.h,
perf.h, util/util.h, util/cache.h and etc.
However, util/sort.h also have #include "cache.h"
and cache.h even include util.h and perf.h.

Isn't this a problem (but this is minor) ?

Of course, this patch don't need to contain codes
to fix this above problem.

Should we fix this problem ?
(If we do, I'd individually send patches for this problem.)


Thanks,
Taeung

On 06/11/2016 09:59 AM, Taeung Song wrote:
> Good evening :)
>
> On 06/11/2016 04:06 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>> Em Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 03:20:43PM +0900, Taeung Song escreveu:
>>> On 06/09/2016 10:29 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>>>>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/cache.h
>>>>> @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
>>>>>    #include <subcmd/pager.h>
>>>>> +#include "config.h"
>>
>>>> Why have you added that? Are those config functions used in cache.h?
>>
>>> Yes, it does. Many source files include cache.h
>>> e.g. builtin-annoate.c, util/color.c, builtin-report.c and etc.
>>> And They can use perf_config() function including this header file.
>>
>>> So, If I totally eliminate not only declarations about config
>>> but also #include "util/config.h" at util/cache.h,
>>> we should add '#include "util/config.h"' to each source file that
>>> need perf_config() overall.
>>
>> Sure, that is how we should do it. We should not include cache.h just to
>> get what is in config.h, we should instead include config.h.
>>
>> This way when we do a change to cache.h we will not be rebuilding all
>> those files that depend on it just to get config.h.
>>
>> What you're doing, removing from cache.h things that shouldn't be there
>> in the first place is good, among other things, because of that.
>>
>
> Granted!
> I've also experienced the situation all those files which include cache.h
> are rebuilt after I changed cache.h.
> It also seems a problem as you mention.
>
> So, I'll send this patch that reflect what you said with v9.
>
> Have a nice weekend :-D
>
> Thanks,
> Taeung