On 23.10.2023 12:17, Oleksii wrote: > On Thu, 2023-10-19 at 13:12 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 19/10/2023 12:41, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> On 19.10.2023 13:27, Julien Grall wrote: >>>> that doesn't involve one arch to symlink headers from another >>>> arch. >>> >>> Whether to use symlinks or #include "../../arch/..." or yet >>> something else is >>> a matter of mechanics. >> >> #include "../../arch/../" is pretty much in the same category. This >> is >> simply hiding the fact they could be in asm-generic. >> >> Anyway, I have shared my view. Let see what the others thinks. > I have the same point: if something is shared at least between two > arch, it should go to ASM-generic.
I continue to disagree: What if one pair of arch-es shares one set of things, and another shares another set? You can't fit both pairs then with a single fallback header (unless of course you make it a big #if / #else / #endif, which I'm inclined to say isn't the goal with headers put in asm-generic/). Jan > And that is the reason why I pushed device.h header to asm-generic. > It is needed to rename some stuff (e.g... GIC ) in it or add some > ifdefs. > > ~ Oleksii
