On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 11:51:06AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 10:34:45AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > * Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 07:29:36AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > > > > > * Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Header moved from linux/pci_ids.h to uapi/linux/pci_ids.h, > > > > > > use the new header directly so we can drop > > > > > > the wrapper in include/linux/pci_ids.h. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c | 2 +- > > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c > > > > > > b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c > > > > > > index 76164e1..3b52a56 100644 > > > > > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c > > > > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/aperture_64.c > > > > > > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ > > > > > > #include <linux/init.h> > > > > > > #include <linux/memblock.h> > > > > > > #include <linux/mmzone.h> > > > > > > -#include <linux/pci_ids.h> > > > > > > +#include <uapi/linux/pci_ids.h> > > > > > > #include <linux/pci.h> > > > > > > #include <linux/bitops.h> > > > > > > #include <linux/suspend.h> > > > > > > -- > > > > > > MST > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > NAK, it's absolutely ridiculous to send a 86 patches series for a > > > > > trivial change like this! > > > > > > > > > > Just do the rename in a single patch and avoid the churn. Even if > > > > > there are conflicts, they are utmost trivial to fix up. > > > > > > > > > > In fact the usual way to do such renames is to wait until the end of > > > > > -rc1, auto-generate it and send Linus the core patch with the trivial > > > > > renames straight away. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > Ingo > > > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately, vger mailing lists reject any email with more than 2k of > > > > email headers. This means if I do what you suggest I can't Cc all > > > > maintainers for all affected files. [...] > > > > > > You can Cc: linux-arch and lkml for tree-wide changes. > > > > > > Also, since it's mostly trivial, there shouldn't be much (if any) > > > controversy about it, right? > > > > I thought so, too. However, I was just proven wrong and the patchset > > was nacked. [...] > > Well, I only NAK-ed its high-churn presentation, not the essence of it > which looks good to me.
Thanks! Another concern voiced was whether it's better to include uapi files using #include <uapi/linux/foo.h> or #include <linux/foo.h>. Both work - I thought #include <uapi/linux/foo.h> makes it easier to figure out where the file is. James Bottomley (Cc'd) thought it's not worth the code churn however, since if we ever add a file under linux/foo.h we'd need to change users back. He also noted that many headers are referenced without the uapi/ prefix, if making the change, we'd have to change them all. OTOH if not, maybe we want to drop all '#include <uapi/linux/foo.h>' converting them to '#include <linux/foo.h>' (and same for asm), except where it's linux/foo.h pulling in uapi/linux/foo.h. That, at least, would make it all consistent. > > [...] Would relevant people notice it if it's just linux-arch? IIUC > > most people don't read lkml. I guess Linus would notice and reject > > it. > > Just keep it in a clean, separate topic branch and point it out in the > pull request - there's no reason to reject good changes, plus with > this structure: > > > > > [...] I could just Cc all mailing lists I guess, but I really > > > > wasn't sure about some parts of the change, deferring it until end > > > > of -rc1 wouldn't be appropriate in this case, would it? > > > > > > So since 90% of the patches are just a trivial: > > > > > > -#include <linux/pci_ids.h> > > > +#include <uapi/linux/pci_ids.h> > > > > > > you can auto-generate that simple rename and file movement into a > > > single commit, at the end of -rc1, without affecting anyone, via > > > something like: > > > > > > sed -i 's/linux\/pci_ids.h/uapi\/linux\/pci_ids.h/g' $(git grep -l > > > linux/pci_ids.h) > > > git mv include/linux/pci_ids.h include/uapi/linux/pci_ids.h > > > git commit -a > > > > > > (totally untested) > > > > > > This should just work. > > > > > > Any other changes, as the removal of inclusions from files that > > > apparently don't need it, or cleanups like the changing of the guard > > > defines in pci_id.h, can be done on top of that - on a one patch per > > > change basis. > > > > > > This should drastically remove the churn. > > it's trivially correct. > > I just tried the untested script above and it generates a commit and a > kernel that builds just fine. > > So with that structure my high-churn complaint gets addressed and my > NAK turns into: > > Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> > > Thanks, > > Ingo If people agree one of the two changes (always, or never, referencing uapi files directly) is worthwhile, I'll follow the procedure you have outlined above. Thanks a lot for the suggestions! -- MST -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
