On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 06:52:21PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 14/01/19 16:49, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 02:08:27PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > >> There are only three include files requiring these typedefs, let them > >> include "hw/nvram/fw_cfg.h" directly to simplify "qemu/typedefs.h". > >> > >> To clean "qemu/typedefs.h", move the declarations to "hw/nvram/fw_cfg.h". > >> Reorder two function declarations to avoid forward typedef declarations. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com> > >> Reviewed-by: Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> > >> --- > >> include/hw/acpi/vmgenid.h | 1 + > >> include/hw/arm/virt.h | 1 + > >> include/hw/mem/nvdimm.h | 1 + > >> include/hw/nvram/fw_cfg.h | 22 ++++++++++++---------- > >> include/qemu/typedefs.h | 4 ---- > >> 5 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > > > I am sorry I don't understand what this patchset is about. > > Supposed to be a cleanup but instead it pulls > > fw cfg into any user of unrelated headers. > > > > More lines of code slower builds what's to like? > > > > Shared typedefs is what typedefs.h is about. > > These are clearly shared so let's keep it simple. > > I can see why this patch can be a bit controversial. Personally I think > it's okay either way (which generally tends to favor the status quo). > > Paolo
True - not something to lose sleep over. -- MST
