On 11 January 2016 at 15:19, Daniel P. Berrange <berra...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 04:23:42PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: >> We've had some discussion previously (on list and IRC) about adding an >> include of "qemu/osdep.h" to everything. The basic idea is that every >> .c file should include "qemu/osdep.h" as its first include; then every >> other header (and the .c file itself) can rely on the facilities that >> osdep.h provides. >> >> This patchset is mostly here to get comment and review on the script >> I've written to do the job of automatically updating the source files.
In the absence of any other comments from anybody I guess we can go ahead and commit this series... (the osdep.h patch it depends on has been committed already). >> Patches 2 and 3 are examples of its output, produced via >> scripts/clean-includes --git target-arm target-arm/*.c >> scripts/clean-includes --git hw/arm hw/arm/*.c >> >> NB: the script assumes my patch to make osdep.h include >> glib-compat.h has already been applied: >> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/552828/ >> >> Once we're happy with the set of transformations it produces the >> next question is how we want to apply it to the tree. The good >> news is that the changes to the .c files are idempotent and don't >> depend on each other, so we could send things via different >> submaintainer trees. Or we could have a single patchseries which we >> apply all at once on the theory that this minimises the pain overall. > > I think either approach would work as long as we don't let it drag > out too long in sub-maintainer trees. ie aim to get every file > cleaned & merged before 2.6 rc. I guess I'll start off with some series for the obviously maintained areas of the tree and then we can mop up the rest later. (At some point a script which identifies files which haven't been cleaned up yet would be handy.) >> A question I had about including osdep.h everywhere: >> are there any files in the tree where we *can't* include it? >> (Obvious possible candidates would be standalone test programs >> and the guest-agent code.) > > I think even guest-agent code & tests could include it in order to > get clean includes, even if they don't use any of the QEMU functions > defined in it. So I think its simplest to just say every .c file must > use it and leave it at that. OK, let's assume that works. thanks -- PMM
