On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 08:12:24PM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > We have a bunch of headers without multiple inclusion guards. Some are > clearly intentional, some look accidental. Too many for me to find out > by examining each of them, so I'm asking their maintainers. > > Why do I ask? I'd like to mark the intentional ones and fix the > accidental ones, so they don't flunk "make check-headers" from "[RFC v4 > 0/7] Baby steps towards saner headers" just because they lack multiple > inclusion guards. > > Just in case: what's a multiple inclusion guard? It's > > #ifndef UNIQUE_GUARD_SYMBOL_H > #define UNIQUE_GUARD_SYMBOL_H > ... > #endif > > with nothing but comments outside the conditional, so that the header > can safely be included more than once. > > I append the alphabetical list of headers without multiple inclusion > guards (as reported by scripts/clean-header-guards -nv), followed by the > same list sorted into maintainer buckets. If you're cc'ed, please find > your bucket(s), and tell me which headers intentionally lack guards. > [...] > X86 > M: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> > M: Richard Henderson <r...@twiddle.net> > M: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> > target/i386/cc_helper_template.h
Intentional. See usage at target/i386/cc_helper.c. > target/i386/helper.h I believe helper.h intentionally lack guards on all architectures. See helper-proto.h, helper-tcg.h, helper-gen.h. > target/i386/ops_sse.h Intentional, see usage at target/i386/fpu_helper.c. > target/i386/ops_sse_header.h Intentional, see usage at target/i386/helper.h. > target/i386/shift_helper_template.h Intentional, see usage at target/i386/int_helper.c. > target/i386/whp-dispatch.h Seems unintentional. [...] > Guest CPU Cores (KVM): > ---------------------- > > Overall > M: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> > include/hw/kvm/clock.h Seems unintentional. [...] > Guest CPU Cores (Xen): > ---------------------- > > X86 > M: Stefano Stabellini <sstabell...@kernel.org> > M: Anthony Perard <anthony.per...@citrix.com> > M: Paul Durrant <paul.durr...@citrix.com> > include/hw/xen/io/ring.h I see a __XEN_PUBLIC_IO_RING_H__ guard there. Probably clean-header-guards.pl is confused by the comments at the end of the file? > [...] -- Eduardo
