Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] cper, apei, mce: Pass x86 CPER through the MCA handling chain

From: Smita Koralahalli Channabasappa <skoralah@amd.com>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
	Punit Agrawal <punit1.agrawal@toshiba.co.jp>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-efi <linux-efi@vger.kernel.org>,
	ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	devel@acpica.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
	Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] cper, apei, mce: Pass x86 CPER through the MCA handling chain
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 16:26:15 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <dbe4781f-124f-e4ae-dc68-406d555061f1@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMj1kXGd8KgP6_-Ebec1wpxpCnjjOe4_uovcYW3GD1BA5au=3Q@mail.gmail.com>

On 9/11/20 1:23 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:

> On Thu, 3 Sep 2020 at 09:34, Punit Agrawal <punit1.agrawal@toshiba.co.jp> wrote:
>> Hi Smita,
>>
>> Smita Koralahalli Channabasappa <skoralah@amd.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 8/31/20 12:05 AM, Punit Agrawal wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Smita,
>>>>
>>>> A couple of comments below -
>>>>
>>>> Smita Koralahalli <Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper-x86.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper-x86.c
>>>>> index 2531de49f56c..374b8e18552a 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/cper-x86.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/cper-x86.c
>>>>> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
>>>>>    // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>>>>>    // Copyright (C) 2018, Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
>>>>>    -#include <linux/cper.h>
>>>> Why is the include dropped? AFAICT, the definitions from there are still
>>>> being used after this patch.
>>> Dropped because <acpi/apei.h> already includes <linux/cper.h>
>> Generally, you want to follow the rule that if a declaration from a
>> header file is being used, it should show up in the includes. The same
>> applies to both source as well as header files.
>>
>> It doesn't matter if another include in the source file in turn ends up
>> including the same header again; the #ifdef guards are there to prevent
>> duplicate declarations.
>>
>> The rationale is that if future changes remove the usage of
>> <acpi/apei.h>, the C file can still be compiled after dropping the
>> include; there should be no need to then re-introduce <linux/cper.h> at
>> that point.
>>
>> Hope that makes sense.
>>
> Agreed. If the code still uses declarations from linux/cper.h after
> the patch, the #include should remain.

Thanks, I have taken care of the comments and sent out the next revision now.
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200903234531.162484-2-Smita.KoralahalliChannabasappa@amd.com.
Please ignore my previous email.

Thanks,
Smita