On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 02:54:30PM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Thu, 19 Jan 2023 at 14:42, Warner Losh <i...@bsdimp.com> wrote: > > > > Also, why didn't you move sys/resource.h and other such files > > to os-dep.h? I'm struggling to understand the rules around what > > is or isn't included where? > > The rough rule of thumb is that if some OS needs a compatibility > fixup or workaround for a system header (eg not every mmap.h > defines MAP_ANONYMOUS; on Windows unistd.h has to come before > time.h) then we put that header include and the compat workaround > into osdep.h. This avoids "only fails on obscure platform" issues > where somebody puts a header include into some specific .c file > but not the compat workaround, and it works on the Linux host > that most people develop and test on and we only find the > problem later. > > There's also no doubt some includes there for historical > reasons, and some which really are "everybody needs these" > convenience ones. But we should probably not add new > includes to osdep.h unless they fall into the "working around > system header issues" bucket. > > thanks > -- PMM
BTW maybe we should teach checkpatch about that rule: if a header is in osdep do not include it directly. -- MST
