On Nov. 12, 2009, 14:48 +0200, Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 11/12/2009 12:35 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote: >> On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 12:28 +0200, Boaz Harrosh wrote: >>> On 10/21/2009 10:14 AM, Boaz Harrosh wrote: >>>> An header should be compilation independent, .i.e pull in >>>> any header who's declarations are directly used by this header. >>>> And not let users re-include all it's dependencies all over >>>> again. >>>> >>>> [At the end of the day what's the use of a header if it does >>>> not have more then one user?] >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Trond do I have an ACK on this patch. >>> If not, then what should be changed to get it accepted? >>> >>>> --- >>>> include/linux/nfs_xdr.h | 1 + >>> This header is used exclusively by fs/nfs/... files and could just be moved >>> there. The include must be fixed as below though. >>> >>>> include/linux/nfsacl.h | 1 + >>> This file is used mixed between fs/nfs && fs/nfsd >>> >>>> include/linux/posix_acl.h | 1 + >>> Used by nfsd and filesystems >>> >>>> 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/nfs_xdr.h b/include/linux/nfs_xdr.h >>>> index 2848a26..c316ca8 100644 >>>> --- a/include/linux/nfs_xdr.h >>>> +++ b/include/linux/nfs_xdr.h >>>> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ >>>> #define _LINUX_NFS_XDR_H >>>> >>>> #include <linux/nfsacl.h> >>>> +#include <linux/nfs3.h> >>>> >>>> /* >>>> * To change the maximum rsize and wsize supported by the NFS client, adjust >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/nfsacl.h b/include/linux/nfsacl.h >>>> index 43011b6..f321b57 100644 >>>> --- a/include/linux/nfsacl.h >>>> +++ b/include/linux/nfsacl.h >>>> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ >>>> #ifdef __KERNEL__ >>>> >>>> #include <linux/posix_acl.h> >>>> +#include <linux/sunrpc/xdr.h> >>>> >>>> /* Maximum number of ACL entries over NFS */ >>>> #define NFS_ACL_MAX_ENTRIES 1024 >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/posix_acl.h b/include/linux/posix_acl.h >>>> index 065a365..0dcf674 100644 >>>> --- a/include/linux/posix_acl.h >>>> +++ b/include/linux/posix_acl.h >>>> @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ >>>> #define __LINUX_POSIX_ACL_H >>>> >>>> #include <linux/slab.h> >>>> +#include <linux/fs.h> >> NACK to this. Pretty much _all_ filesystems already include linux/fs.h >> somewhere in their include chains. There should be no need to include it >> in posix_acl.h too. >> > > from posix_acl.h: > extern int posix_acl_permission(struct inode *, const struct posix_acl *, int); get_cached_acl's inline definition would make a better example as it actually needs the formal definition of struct inode; > > stuct inode is defined in fs.h. hence the direct dependency. > > Again a double inclusion is not a bad thing, it costs absolutely *nothing*. > > A miss-inclusion on the other hand is a bad thing. it causes a miss-compilation. > > It does not matter that filesystems include fs.h or not. What matters is that they > now have to do this headers ordering magic. One places code compiles fine, another > place it does not. When it does not, people *never* analyze the missing dependency > what they do is copy-paste an include list from another file that works. > > Proof of the matter the last patches in this patchset. > >>>> >>>> #define ACL_UNDEFINED_ID (-1) >>>> >> So, what is the motivation for all this? We have no dependency problems >> here today. What is changing in the pNFS tree that makes this so >> necessary? >> The motivation for this patchset was mainly patch 4/5 pnfsd: Move pnfsd code out of nfs4state.c/h Boaz meant to amortize the cleanup effort on this mini-project. Otherwise, by itself, I don't think we'd have started doing it... Benny > > We do have a dependency problem today!! look at the patchset. It is a grate > cleanup and improvement of code today. And a much smoother ride for the future. > > What changed is that all this code was touched today. I have not done the cleanup for > any files not touched by pnfsd. Though I could and should, because they will greatly > improve just like these I did touch. Should I go head and do the reset of the files? > > And please note that this particular file is an NFSD and vfs related file only, it > has nothing to do with nfs. > >> Trond >> > > Boaz -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
