On 12.08.2023 13:37, Julien Grall wrote: > On 12/08/2023 10:53, Nicola Vetrini wrote: >>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/vm_event.c b/xen/arch/x86/vm_event.c >>>> index 7027c08a926b..499b6b349d79 100644 >>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/vm_event.c >>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/vm_event.c >>>> @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@ >>>> >>>> #include <xen/sched.h> >>>> #include <xen/mem_access.h> >>>> +#include <xen/vm_event.h> >>>> #include <asm/vm_event.h> >>>> >>>> /* Implicitly serialized by the domctl lock. */ >>> >>> I think the problem here is that ./arch/x86/include/asm/vm_event.h, >>> differently from ./arch/arm/include/asm/vm_event.h, doesn't #include >>> <xen/vm_event.h> >> >> I see your point. Do you think it would be better to include xen/vm_event.h >> in asm/vm_event.h for x86 or move the inclusion of xen/vm_event.h for >> arm to >> the source file, as done in the patch? > > I think it is a bit odd require the C file to include the arch-specific > header and the common one. It would be better to include only one. > > My preference would be to include <asm/...> from <xen/...> and then only > include the latter in the C file.
+1 Jan
