On 6/5/21 10:50 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 6/4/21 8:52 AM, Alex Bennée wrote: >> diff --git a/target/arm/cpu-exceptions-aa64.h >> b/target/arm/cpu-exceptions-aa64.h >> new file mode 100644 >> index 0000000000..64f800a15d >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/target/arm/cpu-exceptions-aa64.h >> @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ >> +/* >> + * QEMU AArch64 CPU Exceptions Sysemu code >> + * >> + * Copyright (c) 2012 SUSE LINUX Products GmbH >> + * >> + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or >> + * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License >> + * as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 >> + * of the License, or (at your option) any later version. >> + * >> + * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, >> + * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of >> + * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the >> + * GNU General Public License for more details. >> + * >> + * You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License >> + * along with this program; if not, see >> + *<http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html> >> + */ >> + >> +#ifndef CPU_EXCEPTIONS_AA64_H >> +#define CPU_EXCEPTIONS_AA64_H >> + >> +#include "cpu.h" >> + >> +void arm_cpu_do_interrupt_aarch64(CPUState *cs); >> + >> +#endif /* CPU_EXCEPTIONS_AA64_H */ > > I don't see the point in the excessive replication of header files, for > exactly > one declaration. This is not the first example. > > What's wrong with internal.h?
Doesn't mean anything and leads to a mess of unrelated code. I think we should be better at creating meaningful modules, instead of collections of unrelated functions. Not defending this particular change, just answering your specific question. Thanks, C > Or some other header that collects sysemu > specific declarations? > > Also, "cpu.h" is not required by this declaration, as I've pointed out before. > > > r~ >
