diff mbox

[1/2] tools/kvm/9p: Always include system header before our headers

Message ID 87sjr71utd.fsf@linux.vnet.ibm.com (mailing list archive)
State New, archived
Headers show

Commit Message

Aneesh Kumar K.V June 18, 2011, 7:07 a.m. UTC
On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 22:47:39 +0300, Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 15:45 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 23:41 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> > > Otherwise many things can break, such as mapping of stat to stat64
> > 
> > We always include our headers before system headers to make sure we
> > don't have any hidden prerequisites or dependencies within the headers.
> > 
> > Why did you need to move system headers before our headers in this case?
> 
> The stat64() breakage seems rather odd since we do this in the Makefile:
> 
> DEFINES	+= -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
> DEFINES	+= -D_GNU_SOURCE
> 
> Aneesh, what kind of build problems are you seeing?

Ok the below change also fix the issue for me. So it could be some
mapping in the kernel headers

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Comments

Pekka Enberg June 18, 2011, 7:50 a.m. UTC | #1
On Sat, 2011-06-18 at 12:37 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 22:47:39 +0300, Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 15:45 -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 23:41 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> > > > Otherwise many things can break, such as mapping of stat to stat64
> > > 
> > > We always include our headers before system headers to make sure we
> > > don't have any hidden prerequisites or dependencies within the headers.
> > > 
> > > Why did you need to move system headers before our headers in this case?
> > 
> > The stat64() breakage seems rather odd since we do this in the Makefile:
> > 
> > DEFINES	+= -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
> > DEFINES	+= -D_GNU_SOURCE
> > 
> > Aneesh, what kind of build problems are you seeing?
> 
> Ok the below change also fix the issue for me. So it could be some
> mapping in the kernel headers
> 
> diff --git a/tools/kvm/virtio/9p.c b/tools/kvm/virtio/9p.c
> index 38a997d..730f4a1 100644
> --- a/tools/kvm/virtio/9p.c
> +++ b/tools/kvm/virtio/9p.c
> @@ -9,16 +9,16 @@
>  #include "kvm/threadpool.h"
>  #include "kvm/irq.h"
>  
> -#include <linux/virtio_ring.h>
> -#include <linux/virtio_9p.h>
> -#include <net/9p/9p.h>
> -
>  #include <fcntl.h>
>  #include <sys/types.h>
>  #include <sys/stat.h>
>  #include <pthread.h>
>  #include <dirent.h>
>  
> +#include <linux/virtio_ring.h>
> +#include <linux/virtio_9p.h>
> +#include <net/9p/9p.h>
> +
>  #define NUM_VIRT_QUEUES		1
>  #define VIRTIO_P9_QUEUE_SIZE	128
>  #define	VIRTIO_P9_TAG		"kvm_9p"

Yes, makes sense. Can you send that as a proper patch and I'll apply it?

The ordering of #includes is as follows:

  1. Our own headers. This helps in ensuring there's no missing
     #includes in the headers themselves.

  2. Library headers and glibc headers

  3. Linux kernel headers.

Code that doesn't follow that is a bug waiting to happen.

				Pekka

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/tools/kvm/virtio/9p.c b/tools/kvm/virtio/9p.c
index 38a997d..730f4a1 100644
--- a/tools/kvm/virtio/9p.c
+++ b/tools/kvm/virtio/9p.c
@@ -9,16 +9,16 @@ 
 #include "kvm/threadpool.h"
 #include "kvm/irq.h"
 
-#include <linux/virtio_ring.h>
-#include <linux/virtio_9p.h>
-#include <net/9p/9p.h>
-
 #include <fcntl.h>
 #include <sys/types.h>
 #include <sys/stat.h>
 #include <pthread.h>
 #include <dirent.h>
 
+#include <linux/virtio_ring.h>
+#include <linux/virtio_9p.h>
+#include <net/9p/9p.h>
+
 #define NUM_VIRT_QUEUES		1
 #define VIRTIO_P9_QUEUE_SIZE	128
 #define	VIRTIO_P9_TAG		"kvm_9p"