From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7ED4C4708F for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 06:50:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A2A261242 for ; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 06:50:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229581AbhFBGvq (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jun 2021 02:51:46 -0400 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.158.5]:9732 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229737AbhFBGvl (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jun 2021 02:51:41 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098416.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 1526YESt183504; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 02:49:58 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=eV7OHaaJkxhnxAKYxQ3UBXiQubYpTc8z6/Iva34uIBE=; b=gCkyuaVJJGpN2/Vgzs7G/zu6ZJRxyMhNA1/xyWcO5kxDJVfghYUVQFtwNz5qM7DP3XP5 cS3NCvg1jOEzC2QKh0C+x2ymgXeJpF4r/91hg6FXWv+dhVHmr4OH/ugkjAUS/TK/3wY7 LuHkRqx3JBFeEhmB9B4PBuGpMELcXubSIWsKbqkwJkjyss8ydf3q7i0rFHWLGcXypwCZ 3XIACI1milEwAss4DV3Jrte9DXoD3f21LGKc6ZS6X+K78ZXoBKSlyHEM3xUdF5JbeY1Z bhZg6lHSaBUJkMXIRUPl1pbQUTFQajGywANqx9fz9z7UfxtL+1AXkojyxPQHpjMyyt5h FQ== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 38x20j43s4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 02 Jun 2021 02:49:58 -0400 Received: from m0098416.ppops.net (m0098416.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 1526ZUHi186605; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 02:49:58 -0400 Received: from ppma01fra.de.ibm.com (46.49.7a9f.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [159.122.73.70]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 38x20j43rq-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 02 Jun 2021 02:49:58 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma01fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma01fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 1526n89r030702; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 06:49:56 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay13.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.198]) by ppma01fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 38ud88964d-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 02 Jun 2021 06:49:56 +0000 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 1526nsDB29491474 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 2 Jun 2021 06:49:54 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBA684C040; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 06:49:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 501634C046; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 06:49:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.145.24.5]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 2 Jun 2021 06:49:53 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH] s390x: unify header guards To: Thomas Huth , Cornelia Huck , David Hildenbrand , Claudio Imbrenda Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini , Andrew Jones References: <20210601161525.462315-1-cohuck@redhat.com> From: Janosch Frank Message-ID: <28419313-ab8e-322e-4995-30f42e4f5236@linux.ibm.com> Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 08:49:52 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: qCyUMehGgiQSabYvi8dtvaYi9iY-ejG8 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: pq3rBoS0tiEPDm9VcysTNGXlnoHTfwua X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391,18.0.761 definitions=2021-06-02_01:2021-06-01,2021-06-02 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 malwarescore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 spamscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 clxscore=1015 suspectscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2104190000 definitions=main-2106020041 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org On 6/2/21 5:56 AM, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 01/06/2021 18.15, Cornelia Huck wrote: >> Let's unify the header guards to _ASM_S390X_FILE_H_ respectively >> _S390X_FILE_H_. This makes it more obvious what the file is >> about, and avoids possible name space collisions. >> >> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck >> --- >> >> Only did s390x for now; the other archs seem to be inconsistent in >> places as well, and I can also try to tackle them if it makes sense. > ... >> diff --git a/lib/s390x/asm/bitops.h b/lib/s390x/asm/bitops.h >> index 792881ec3249..61cd38fd36b7 100644 >> --- a/lib/s390x/asm/bitops.h >> +++ b/lib/s390x/asm/bitops.h >> @@ -8,8 +8,8 @@ >> * Author(s): Martin Schwidefsky , >> * >> */ >> -#ifndef _ASMS390X_BITOPS_H_ >> -#define _ASMS390X_BITOPS_H_ >> +#ifndef _ASM_S390X_BITOPS_H_ >> +#define _ASM_S390X_BITOPS_H_ > > Why not the other way round (S390X_ASM_BITOPS_H) ? > > > diff --git a/s390x/sthyi.h b/s390x/sthyi.h > > index bbd74c6197c3..eb92fdd2f2b2 100644 > > --- a/s390x/sthyi.h > > +++ b/s390x/sthyi.h > > @@ -7,8 +7,8 @@ > > * Authors: > > * Janosch Frank > > */ > > -#ifndef _STHYI_H_ > > -#define _STHYI_H_ > > +#ifndef _S390X_STHYI_H_ > > +#define _S390X_STHYI_H_ > > While we're at it: Do we also want to drop the leading (and trailing) > underscores here? ... since leading underscore followed by a capital letter > is a reserved namespace in C and you should normally not use these in nice > programs...? I think I'm ok with keeping the underscores in the files in the > lib folder (since these are our core libraries, similar to the system and > libc headers on a normal system), but in files that are not part of the lib > folder, we should rather avoid them. Yes please. Also, I have the feeling that we should document our decision so we can point people to a file if questions arise. > > Thomas >