On 22.02.2024 15:43, Nicola Vetrini wrote: >>> In passing it should be noted that the header ordering in >>> x86/alternative.c is not the one usually prescribed, so that may be >>> taken care of as well. >> >> I'm afraid I don't understand this remark. >> > > I just meant to say that this > > #include <xen/delay.h> > #include <xen/types.h> > #include <asm/apic.h> > #include <asm/endbr.h> > #include <asm/processor.h> > #include <asm/alternative.h> > #include <xen/init.h> > #include <asm/setup.h> > #include <asm/system.h> > #include <asm/traps.h> > #include <asm/nmi.h> > #include <asm/nops.h> > #include <xen/livepatch.h> > > is not the usual order of xen/*.h then asm/*.h and there is no comment > justifying that ordering.
Well, you'll find such in many other places. It hasn't been for that long that we've been trying to get #include-s into a more predictable shape. > So in the process of including asm/flushtlb.h > here the inclusion order can be tidied up (or also indipendently), > unless there is some reason I'm missing that disallows it. Independently, if at all possible, would be better. Unless of course you need to touch almost all of that block anyway. Jan
