From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 00/14] split exception table content out of module.h into extable.h Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 21:18:19 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20160725034247.109173-1-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Andrew Morton , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Catalin Marinas , Chris Metcalf , "David S. Miller" , Geert Uytterhoeven , Heiko Carstens , Helge Deller , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Ivan Kokshaysky , "James E.J. Bottomley" , Martin Schwidefsky , Matt Turner , Michael Ellerman , Paul Mackerras , Ralf Baechle , Richard Henderson , Russell King , Rus To: Paul Gortmaker Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160725034247.109173-1-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> List-ID: List-Id: linux-parisc.vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 8:42 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > While doing an audit looking for unnecessary instances of module.h > inclusion across arch/x86/ I found a significant number of includes > of module.h were for things like search_exception_table and friends. > > For historical reasons (i.e. pre-git) the exception table stuff was > buried in the middle of the module.h file. So we have core kernel > files that are completely non-modular (both arch specific and arch > independent) that are just including module.h for this. > > The converse is also true, in that conventional drivers, be they for > filesystems or actual hardware peripherals or similar, do not > normally care about the exception tables. > > Here we fork the exception table content [...] This looks to be the right thing to do as far as I can tell. I'm not sure how big of a problem the extable stuff is (we definitely have much bigger unnecessary include files that cause a lot more problems), but it seems like a reasonable cleanup. Linus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752783AbcGYESe (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jul 2016 00:18:34 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f67.google.com ([209.85.218.67]:36290 "EHLO mail-oi0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752650AbcGYESV (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jul 2016 00:18:21 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160725034247.109173-1-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> References: <20160725034247.109173-1-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 21:18:19 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: t7YqHOiU7yfO1fe6tNwpibm4QBg Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 00/14] split exception table content out of module.h into extable.h To: Paul Gortmaker Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Andrew Morton , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Catalin Marinas , Chris Metcalf , "David S. Miller" , Geert Uytterhoeven , Heiko Carstens , Helge Deller , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Ivan Kokshaysky , "James E.J. Bottomley" , Martin Schwidefsky , Matt Turner , Michael Ellerman , Paul Mackerras , Ralf Baechle , Richard Henderson , Russell King , Rusty Russell , Thomas Gleixner , Will Deacon , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "Linux/m68k" , linux-mips , Parisc List , ppc-dev , linux-s390 , "the arch/x86 maintainers" , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 8:42 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > While doing an audit looking for unnecessary instances of module.h > inclusion across arch/x86/ I found a significant number of includes > of module.h were for things like search_exception_table and friends. > > For historical reasons (i.e. pre-git) the exception table stuff was > buried in the middle of the module.h file. So we have core kernel > files that are completely non-modular (both arch specific and arch > independent) that are just including module.h for this. > > The converse is also true, in that conventional drivers, be they for > filesystems or actual hardware peripherals or similar, do not > normally care about the exception tables. > > Here we fork the exception table content [...] This looks to be the right thing to do as far as I can tell. I'm not sure how big of a problem the extable stuff is (we definitely have much bigger unnecessary include files that cause a lot more problems), but it seems like a reasonable cleanup. Linus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 00/14] split exception table content out of module.h into extable.h Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 21:18:19 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20160725034247.109173-1-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160725034247.109173-1-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> Sender: linux-alpha-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Paul Gortmaker Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Andrew Morton , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Catalin Marinas , Chris Metcalf , "David S. Miller" , Geert Uytterhoeven , Heiko Carstens , Helge Deller , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Ivan Kokshaysky , "James E.J. Bottomley" , Martin Schwidefsky , Matt Turner , Michael Ellerman , Paul Mackerras , Ralf Baechle , Richard Henderson , Russell King Rus List-Id: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 8:42 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > While doing an audit looking for unnecessary instances of module.h > inclusion across arch/x86/ I found a significant number of includes > of module.h were for things like search_exception_table and friends. > > For historical reasons (i.e. pre-git) the exception table stuff was > buried in the middle of the module.h file. So we have core kernel > files that are completely non-modular (both arch specific and arch > independent) that are just including module.h for this. > > The converse is also true, in that conventional drivers, be they for > filesystems or actual hardware peripherals or similar, do not > normally care about the exception tables. > > Here we fork the exception table content [...] This looks to be the right thing to do as far as I can tell. I'm not sure how big of a problem the extable stuff is (we definitely have much bigger unnecessary include files that cause a lot more problems), but it seems like a reasonable cleanup. Linus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-f67.google.com ([209.85.218.67]:36290 "EHLO mail-oi0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752650AbcGYESV (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Jul 2016 00:18:21 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160725034247.109173-1-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> References: <20160725034247.109173-1-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 21:18:19 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 00/14] split exception table content out of module.h into extable.h Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Paul Gortmaker Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Andrew Morton , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Catalin Marinas , Chris Metcalf , "David S. Miller" , Geert Uytterhoeven , Heiko Carstens , Helge Deller , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Ivan Kokshaysky , "James E.J. Bottomley" , Martin Schwidefsky , Matt Turner , Michael Ellerman , Paul Mackerras , Ralf Baechle , Richard Henderson , Russell King , Rusty Russell , Thomas Gleixner , Will Deacon , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Linux/m68k , linux-mips , Parisc List , ppc-dev , linux-s390 , the arch/x86 maintainers , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20160725041819.7s0tt1-MMl8Z4yOmK4JUJSJ_z_zQbp5TOZWzgbPfRqM@z> On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 8:42 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > While doing an audit looking for unnecessary instances of module.h > inclusion across arch/x86/ I found a significant number of includes > of module.h were for things like search_exception_table and friends. > > For historical reasons (i.e. pre-git) the exception table stuff was > buried in the middle of the module.h file. So we have core kernel > files that are completely non-modular (both arch specific and arch > independent) that are just including module.h for this. > > The converse is also true, in that conventional drivers, be they for > filesystems or actual hardware peripherals or similar, do not > normally care about the exception tables. > > Here we fork the exception table content [...] This looks to be the right thing to do as far as I can tell. I'm not sure how big of a problem the extable stuff is (we definitely have much bigger unnecessary include files that cause a lot more problems), but it seems like a reasonable cleanup. Linus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2016 04:18:19 +0000 Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 00/14] split exception table content out of module.h into extable.h Message-Id: List-Id: References: <20160725034247.109173-1-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> In-Reply-To: <20160725034247.109173-1-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Paul Gortmaker Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , Andrew Morton , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Catalin Marinas , Chris Metcalf , "David S. Miller" , Geert Uytterhoeven , Heiko Carstens , Helge Deller , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ingo Molnar , Ivan Kokshaysky , "James E.J. Bottomley" , Martin Schwidefsky , Matt Turner , Michael Ellerman , Paul Mackerras , Ralf Baechle , Richard Henderson , Russell King Rus On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 8:42 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > While doing an audit looking for unnecessary instances of module.h > inclusion across arch/x86/ I found a significant number of includes > of module.h were for things like search_exception_table and friends. > > For historical reasons (i.e. pre-git) the exception table stuff was > buried in the middle of the module.h file. So we have core kernel > files that are completely non-modular (both arch specific and arch > independent) that are just including module.h for this. > > The converse is also true, in that conventional drivers, be they for > filesystems or actual hardware peripherals or similar, do not > normally care about the exception tables. > > Here we fork the exception table content [...] This looks to be the right thing to do as far as I can tell. I'm not sure how big of a problem the extable stuff is (we definitely have much bigger unnecessary include files that cause a lot more problems), but it seems like a reasonable cleanup. Linus From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: torvalds@linux-foundation.org (Linus Torvalds) Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2016 21:18:19 -0700 Subject: [RFC/PATCH 00/14] split exception table content out of module.h into extable.h In-Reply-To: <20160725034247.109173-1-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> References: <20160725034247.109173-1-paul.gortmaker@windriver.com> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sun, Jul 24, 2016 at 8:42 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > > While doing an audit looking for unnecessary instances of module.h > inclusion across arch/x86/ I found a significant number of includes > of module.h were for things like search_exception_table and friends. > > For historical reasons (i.e. pre-git) the exception table stuff was > buried in the middle of the module.h file. So we have core kernel > files that are completely non-modular (both arch specific and arch > independent) that are just including module.h for this. > > The converse is also true, in that conventional drivers, be they for > filesystems or actual hardware peripherals or similar, do not > normally care about the exception tables. > > Here we fork the exception table content [...] This looks to be the right thing to do as far as I can tell. I'm not sure how big of a problem the extable stuff is (we definitely have much bigger unnecessary include files that cause a lot more problems), but it seems like a reasonable cleanup. Linus