On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 02:45:16PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 07:05:28PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 09:58:47AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 06:17:34PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 08:45:19AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
... > > > > > Rename the efi function to avoid the conflict. > > > > > > > > Hmm... Why not split this to two, rename patch as a standalone makes > > > > sense to > > > > me even outside of this series. > > > > > > How so? If nls.h is not included in printk.c via string.h, which does > > > not happen without this series, what value does the rename have? I do > > > not mind splitting it up that way to keep things cleaner, I am just > > > wondering what would be the justification in the changelog (I guess just > > > that nls.h may get included in the future for some reason)? > > > > Inside this series the justification is obvious (a.k.a. the same), outside > > yes something like "Put EFI specific function to the respective namespace > > to avoid potential clash in the future when including another header." > > Okay, sounds reasonable to me. This is what I ended up with for that > change, which will become patch one of the series. LGTM. However, now I'm thinking about nls.h appearing in the string.h. The former actually lacks two headers in it: module.h and types.h. I'm wondering if fixing nls.h would be even possible after your series. > with basically the same changelog. > > I will send v2 either tomorrow afternoon or Thursday morning to give a > little more time for initial review/comments. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
