From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7F72C433ED for ; Thu, 6 May 2021 07:42:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1785E611CB for ; Thu, 6 May 2021 07:42:49 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1785E611CB Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:59538 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1leYel-0004i7-SI for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Thu, 06 May 2021 03:42:47 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38000) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1leYdn-00043b-3x for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 May 2021 03:41:47 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:54875) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1leYdj-00007a-Hc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 06 May 2021 03:41:46 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1620286902; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=e+ggcmo21xNyGLXNnKPqbKPOyEw8SUk831cgOAuyEug=; b=S1IwclWTx96udBnO5fCcBZ3G7kWhIBgyUZ0nogYB3CBH5sKAUbOyLE1wlwMoeNorDAN8Kc jGz+9MBIFKag9FKAyRNEqK1qN0zdyOMTVG131rYFfBuNR631ubJIdy5dovM/ewkzO3/BiX 7BybkhqoTmnhtei6T6YtTW7QsBVPiR4= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-128-Q7Lvm7j-P4G6hPgPHkl3eg-1; Thu, 06 May 2021 03:41:40 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Q7Lvm7j-P4G6hPgPHkl3eg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 767D4801107; Thu, 6 May 2021 07:41:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dresden.str.redhat.com (ovpn-113-220.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.220]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78BDE5D6A8; Thu, 6 May 2021 07:41:37 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 9/9] block/write-threshold: drop extra includes To: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy , qemu-block@nongnu.org References: <20210504082553.20377-1-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> <20210504082553.20377-10-vsementsov@virtuozzo.com> <908586ae-f631-d626-3963-5b96d0c69b05@redhat.com> From: Max Reitz Message-ID: <5ce22fba-6b8c-f362-5abf-7a32835ee97e@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 6 May 2021 09:41:35 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=mreitz@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=mreitz@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -34 X-Spam_score: -3.5 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.5 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.693, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: fam@euphon.net, kwolf@redhat.com, eesposit@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, stefanha@redhat.com, pbonzini@redhat.com Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 05.05.21 22:34, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: > 05.05.2021 19:23, Max Reitz wrote: >> On 04.05.21 10:25, Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Vladimir Sementsov-Ogievskiy >>> --- >>>   block/write-threshold.c | 3 --- >>>   1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/block/write-threshold.c b/block/write-threshold.c >>> index fbf4e6f5c4..db271c5537 100644 >>> --- a/block/write-threshold.c >>> +++ b/block/write-threshold.c >>> @@ -12,10 +12,7 @@ >>>    */ >>>   #include "qemu/osdep.h" >>> -#include "block/block_int.h" >> >> We need this (for bs->write_threshold_offset), but it’s included >> through block/block_int.h.  I’m not sure whether we should drop it >> from the includes. >> >> Perhaps we should instead drop block_int.h from write-threshold.h? >> Shouldn’t including qemu/osdep.h (which includes qemu/typedefs.h, >> which forward-declares BDS) be sufficient there? >> >>> -#include "qemu/coroutine.h" >>>   #include "block/write-threshold.h" >>> -#include "qemu/notify.h" >>>   #include "qapi/error.h" >>>   #include "qapi/qapi-commands-block-core.h" >>>   #include "qapi/qapi-events-block-core.h" >> >> Btw, where does qemu/atomic.h come in?  Looks like it comes through >> block_int.h.  I think we should include it explicitly. >> > > I'm not sure. If something is included through another include, why to > include it explicitly? Because the other include may change. I’d include something if you need the feature, and we need atomics here. And block_int.h doesn’t even provide atomic.h, it comes through various of its includes (which are probably not included to provide atomics). So this is already indirect and basically just incidental; block_int.h doesn’t guarantee atomic.h. Another thing: I see that other fields in BDS that are to be accessed with atomic ops have a comment saying so. I think write_threshold_offset should have, too. Max > For me, if statement can be removed with no effect, it's an extra > statement. > >