From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:46181) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gfNFR-0003wC-28 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2019 06:02:45 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gfNFN-000162-Tg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2019 06:02:41 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-f66.google.com ([209.85.128.66]:33540) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gfNFN-00015h-NK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2019 06:02:37 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-f66.google.com with SMTP id r24so855085wmh.0 for ; Fri, 04 Jan 2019 03:02:37 -0800 (PST) References: <20190104082731.24967-1-pbonzini@redhat.com> <20190104082731.24967-2-pbonzini@redhat.com> <20190104102655.3bf599f5.cohuck@redhat.com> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2019 12:02:37 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190104102655.3bf599f5.cohuck@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] scripts/update-linux-headers.sh: adjust for Linux 4.21-rc1 (or 5.0-rc1) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Cornelia Huck Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mst@redhat.com On 04/01/19 10:26, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Fri, 4 Jan 2019 09:27:30 +0100 > Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> There are three new indirect inclusions: vhost_types.h, which we'll >> shortly put to use as a portable header and thus is copied to >> standard-headers; and new per-subtarget versions of MIPS unistd.h >> and PowerPC unistd.h. >> >> Because vhost.h includes vhost_types.h, we also need a proxy include >> from linux/vhost.h to standard-headers. >> >> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini >> --- >> scripts/update-linux-headers.sh | 11 +++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) > > I still think we could squash this change (and the description :) with > the headers update, but I don't object to a separate change, either. Me too, but I figured I'd rather not pull another tantrum like I did for multiline comments... Paolo