From: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
To: Himanshu Jha <himanshujha199640@gmail.com>
Cc: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
amitkarwar@gmail.com, nishants@marvell.com, gbhat@marvell.com,
huxm@marvell.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mwifiex: Use put_unaligned_le32
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 11:02:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171005180248.GA94139@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171005152233.GA6250@himanshu-Vostro-3559>
On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 08:52:33PM +0530, Himanshu Jha wrote:
> There are various instances where a function used in file say for eg
> int func_align (void* a)
> is used and it is defined in align.h
> But many files don't *directly* include align.h and rather include
> any other header which includes align.h
I believe the general rule is that you should included headers for all
symbols you use, and not rely on implicit includes.
The modification to the general rule is that not all headers are
intended to be included directly, and in such cases there's likely a
parent header that is the more appropriate target.
In this case, the key is CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS. It
seems that asm-generic/unaligned.h is set up to include different
headers, based on the expected architecture behavior.
I wonder if include/linux/unaligned/access_ok.h should have a safety
check (e.g., raise an #error if
!CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS?).
> Is compiling the file the only way to check if apppropriate header is
> included or is there some other way to check for it.
I believe it's mostly manual. Implicit includes have been a problem for
anyone who refactors header files.
Brian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-05 18:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-04 18:28 [PATCH] mwifiex: Use put_unaligned_le32 Himanshu Jha
2017-10-05 7:23 ` Kalle Valo
2017-10-05 8:34 ` Himanshu Jha
2017-10-05 8:41 ` Kalle Valo
2017-10-05 15:22 ` Himanshu Jha
2017-10-05 18:02 ` Brian Norris [this message]
2017-10-05 19:07 ` Himanshu Jha
2017-10-05 21:54 ` Igor Mitsyanko
2017-10-06 13:31 ` Kalle Valo
2017-10-07 3:31 ` kbuild test robot
2017-10-07 5:17 ` kbuild test robot
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=20171005180248.GA94139@google.com \
--to=briannorris@chromium.org \
--cc=amitkarwar@gmail.com \
--cc=gbhat@marvell.com \
--cc=himanshujha199640@gmail.com \
--cc=huxm@marvell.com \
--cc=kvalo@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nishants@marvell.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).