On 2019/7/31 20:07, Chao Yu wrote: > Hi Xiang, > > On 2019/7/31 15:08, Gao Xiang wrote: >> Hi Chao, >> >> On 2019/7/31 15:03, Chao Yu wrote: >>> On 2019/7/29 14:51, Gao Xiang wrote: >>>> Because #include "internal.h" is included in xattr.h >>> >>> I think it would be better to remove "internal.h" in xattr.h, and include them >>> both in .c file in where we need xattr definition. >> >> It seems that all xattr related source files needing internal.h, >> and we need "EROFS_V(inode)", "struct erofs_sb_info", ... stuffs in xattr.h, >> which is defined in internal.h... > > Since I checked f2fs', it looks it's okay to don't include internal.h for > xattr.h, if .c needs xattr.h, we can just include interanl.h and xattr.h in the > head of it, it's safe. I think xattr.h should be used independently (all dependencies of xattr.h should be included in xattr.h, most of include files behave like that)... Maybe it is not a good way to follow f2fs... Thanks, Gao Xiang > > Thanks, > >> >> Thanks, >> Gao Xiang >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >> . >> _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
