On 09.08.2023 16:17, Nicola Vetrini wrote: > On 09/08/2023 14:52, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 09.08.2023 13:02, Nicola Vetrini wrote: >>> The additional header file makes the declaration for the function >>> 'init_IRQ', defined in this file visible, thereby resolving the >>> violation of Rule 8.4. >>> >>> No functional change. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetr...@bugseng.com> >>> --- >>> xen/arch/x86/i8259.c | 1 + >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/i8259.c b/xen/arch/x86/i8259.c >>> index 6b35be10f0..9b02a3a0ae 100644 >>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/i8259.c >>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/i8259.c >>> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ >>> #include <xen/delay.h> >>> #include <asm/apic.h> >>> #include <asm/asm_defns.h> >>> +#include <asm/setup.h> >>> #include <io_ports.h> >>> #include <irq_vectors.h> >> >> A patch adding this #include has been pending for almost 3 months: >> https://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2023-05/msg00896.html > > So do you prefer going forward with that patch or this one (mentioning > it > in the additional commit context of course)?
I would prefer using the much older patch, but of course this requires someone providing R-b or A-b. Jan
