Re: [PATCH] hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288: Remove unnecessary includes

[Cornelia Huck]

On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 19:41:40 +0100
Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 23/11/2020 16.59, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> > On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 11:47:25 +0100
> > Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> writes:
> >>  
> >>> On 18/11/2020 15.30, Peter Maydell wrote:    
> >>>> On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 at 14:24, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com> 
> >>>> wrote:    
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> writes:
> >>>>>    
> >>>>>> On 11/18/20 10:03 AM, Thomas Huth wrote:    
> >>>>>>> Both headers, sysbus.h and module.h, are not required to compile this 
> >>>>>>> file.    
> >>>>>
> >>>>> module.h is: it defines type_init().    
> >>>>     
> >>>>>>>  #include "qemu/timer.h"
> >>>>>>>  #include "hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.h"
> >>>>>>>  #include "migration/vmstate.h"
> >>>>>>>  #include "qemu/log.h"
> >>>>>>> -#include "qemu/module.h"    
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Cc'ing Markus because of:    
> >>>>     
> >>>>>>     Include qemu/module.h where needed, drop it from qemu-common.h    
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If it still compiles and links, it must get it via some other header.   
> >>>>>  
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes: wdt_diag288.c -> include/hw/watchdog/wdt_diag288.h ->
> >>>>  include/qom/object.h -> include/qemu/module.h    
> >>>
> >>> So what's now our expectation here? Should every file that uses 
> >>> type_init()
> >>> also include module.h ? That's IMHO not very intuitive...
> >>> Or are we fine that type_init() is provided by qom/object.h which needs to
> >>> be pulled in by every device sooner or later anyway?    
> >>
> >> I think it's okay to rely on indirect inclusion.  
> > 
> > So, what's the final verdict? Maybe just tweak the description?
> > 
> > "Neither sysbus.h nor module.h are required to compile this file.
> > diag288 is not a sysbus device, and module.h (for type_init) is
> > included eventually through qom/object.h."  
> 
> Yes, I think that's the way to go. Could you update the description when
> picking up the patch, or shall I send a v2?

No need for a v2, I queued it to s390-next with an updated description.