Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 23 Apr 2018 15:03:47 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     NeilBrown <neilb@suse.com>
Cc:     James Simmons <jsimmons@infradead.org>,
        Oleg Drokin <oleg.drokin@intel.com>,
        Andreas Dilger <andreas.dilger@intel.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Lustre Development List <lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] staging: lustre: remove libcfs/linux/libcfs.h
Message-ID: <20180423130347.GB17153@kroah.com>
References: <152383910760.23409.2327082725637657049.stgit@noble>
 <152383935734.23409.11654775387996961581.stgit@noble>
 <alpine.LFD.2.21.1804160431550.16188@casper.infradead.org>
 <874lk9s0ri.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <874lk9s0ri.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.5 (2018-04-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 12:32:01PM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 16 2018, James Simmons wrote:
> 
> >> This include file is only included in one place,
> >> and only contains a list of other include directives.
> >> So just move all those to the place where this file
> >> is included, and discard the file.
> >> 
> >> One include directive uses a local name ("linux-cpu.h"), so
> >> that needs to be given a proper path.
> >> 
> >> Probably many of these should be remove from here, and moved to
> >> just the files that need them.
> >
> > Nak. Dumping all the extra headers from linux/libcfs.h to libcfs.h is
> > the wrong approach. The one header, libcfs.h, to be the only header
> > in all lustre files is the wrong approach. I have been looking to
> > unroll that mess. I have patch that I need to polish you that I can
> > submit.
> 
> I think we both have the same goal - maybe just different paths to get
> there.  If you have something nearly ready to submit, I'm happy to wait
> for it, then proceed on top of it.

I've taken this patch as it doesn't make anything worse than the total
mess we have now :)

thanks,

greg k-h