From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:55803) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gj6Py-0000Yp-6C for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2019 12:52:58 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gj6Px-00040n-Ds for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2019 12:52:58 -0500 References: <20190114130829.21790-1-philmd@redhat.com> <20190114130829.21790-2-philmd@redhat.com> <20190114104559-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 18:52:21 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190114104559-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 1/3] hw/nvram/fw_cfg: Remove various typedefs from "qemu/typedefs.h" List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" , =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu-Daud=c3=a9?= Cc: Thomas Huth , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Peter Maydell , Xiao Guangrong , Ben Warren , "open list:Virt" , Gerd Hoffmann , Igor Mammedov , Laszlo Ersek On 14/01/19 16:49, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 02:08:27PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9 w= rote: >> There are only three include files requiring these typedefs, let them >> include "hw/nvram/fw_cfg.h" directly to simplify "qemu/typedefs.h". >> >> To clean "qemu/typedefs.h", move the declarations to "hw/nvram/fw_cfg.= h". >> Reorder two function declarations to avoid forward typedef declaration= s. >> >> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9 >> Reviewed-by: Laszlo Ersek >> --- >> include/hw/acpi/vmgenid.h | 1 + >> include/hw/arm/virt.h | 1 + >> include/hw/mem/nvdimm.h | 1 + >> include/hw/nvram/fw_cfg.h | 22 ++++++++++++---------- >> include/qemu/typedefs.h | 4 ---- >> 5 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) >=20 > I am sorry I don't understand what this patchset is about. > Supposed to be a cleanup but instead it pulls > fw cfg into any user of unrelated headers. >=20 > More lines of code slower builds what's to like? >=20 > Shared typedefs is what typedefs.h is about. > These are clearly shared so let's keep it simple. I can see why this patch can be a bit controversial. Personally I think it's okay either way (which generally tends to favor the status quo). Paolo