On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 10:05:03AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote: > s/unecessary/unnecessary > > On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 10:55:58AM -0500, Peter Xu wrote: > > linux/kvm_host.h and asm/kvm_host.h have a dependency in that the asm > > header should be included first, then we can define arch-specific > > macros in asm/ header and use "#ifndef" in linux/ header to define the > > generic value of the macro. One example is KVM_MAX_VCPU_ID. > > > > Now in many C files we've got both the headers included, and > > linux/kvm_host.h is included even earlier. It's working only because > > in linux/kvm_host.h we also included asm/kvm_host.h anyway so the > > explicit inclusion of asm/kvm_host.h in the C files are meaningless. > > I'd prefer to word this much more strongly, i.e. there is no "should" > about it, including asm/kvm_host.h in linux/kvm_host.h is deliberate, > it's not serendipitous. > > ``` > Remove includes of asm/kvm_host.h from files that already include > linux/kvm_host.h to make it more obvious that there is no ordering issue > between the two headers. linux/kvm_host.h includes asm/kvm_host.h to > pick up architecture specific settings, and this will never change, i.e. > including asm/kvm_host.h after linux/kvm_host.h may seem problematic, > but in practice is simply redundant. > ``` > > As for the change itself, I'm indifferent. Sure, I'll fix up these and repost. Thanks, -- Peter Xu
