On 04.05.2023 15:07, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> Nothing in x86/bitops uses anything from x86/cpufeatureset, and it is creating
> problems when trying to untangle other aspects of feature handling.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com>
> ---
> CC: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
> CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger....@citrix.com>
> CC: Wei Liu <w...@xen.org>
> ---
> xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h | 1 -
> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h
> b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h
> index 5a71afbc89d5..aa8bd65b4565 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/bitops.h
> @@ -6,7 +6,6 @@
> */
>
> #include <asm/alternative.h>
> -#include <asm/cpufeatureset.h>
Prior to your 44325775f724 ("x86/cpuid: Untangle the <asm/cpufeature.h>
include hierachy") it was asm/cpufeature.h that was included here,
presumably for the use of X86_FEATURE_BMI1 in __scanbit(). I guess that
wants to be asm/cpufeatures.h now instead?
Jan
