On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 11:02:50AM -0700, Brian Norris wrote: > On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 08:52:33PM +0530, Himanshu Jha wrote: > > There are various instances where a function used in file say for eg > > int func_align (void* a) > > is used and it is defined in align.h > > But many files don't *directly* include align.h and rather include > > any other header which includes align.h > > I believe the general rule is that you should included headers for all > symbols you use, and not rely on implicit includes. > > The modification to the general rule is that not all headers are > intended to be included directly, and in such cases there's likely a > parent header that is the more appropriate target. > > In this case, the key is CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS. It > seems that asm-generic/unaligned.h is set up to include different > headers, based on the expected architecture behavior. > Yes, asm-generic/unaligned.h looks more appopriate and is most generic implementation of unaligned accesses and arc specific. Let's see what Kalle Valo recommends! And then I will send v2 of the patch. Thanks for the information! Himanshu Jha > I wonder if include/linux/unaligned/access_ok.h should have a safety > check (e.g., raise an #error if > !CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS?). > > > Is compiling the file the only way to check if apppropriate header is > > included or is there some other way to check for it. > > I believe it's mostly manual. Implicit includes have been a problem for > anyone who refactors header files. > > Brian
