On 12.09.2023 11:36, Simone Ballarin wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/efi/runtime.h
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/efi/runtime.h
> @@ -1,3 +1,6 @@
> +#ifndef __X86_EFI_RUNTIME_H__
> +#define __X86_EFI_RUNTIME_H__
> +
>  #include <xen/domain_page.h>
>  #include <xen/mm.h>
>  #include <asm/atomic.h>
> @@ -17,3 +20,5 @@ void efi_update_l4_pgtable(unsigned int l4idx, l4_pgentry_t 
> l4e)
>      }
>  }
>  #endif
> +
> +#endif /* __X86_EFI_RUNTIME_H__ */

Leaving aside that I remain unconvinced of the usefulness of these in
(at least some) private headers, I think there's a naming issue to be
solved first: How do we distinguish guards of headers in xen/include/
and xen/arch/*/include/ from ones living elsewhere? If we don't set
forth a rule, the guard above might be re-used in a hypothetical
xen/arch/x86/include/asm/efi/runtime.h, with potentially interesting
effects. At a first glance it might work to simply omit "component"
identifiers, i.e. just use __RUNTIME_H__ here. Provided suitable
prefixes are used in all non-private headers. But I may of course be
overlooking pitfalls ...

Jan

Reply via email to