Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 26 Aug 2022 18:35:53 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To:     Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>
Cc:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>, Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: deduplicate cacheline padding code
Message-Id: <20220826183553.4b923552ccddb07f0a78ac8b@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20220826230642.566725-1-shakeelb@google.com>
References: <20220826230642.566725-1-shakeelb@google.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 26 Aug 2022 23:06:42 +0000 Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com> wrote:

> There are three users (mmzone.h, memcontrol.h, page_counter.h) using
> similar code for forcing cacheline padding between fields of different
> structures. Dedup that code.
> 
> ...
> 
>  include/linux/cache.h        | 13 +++++++++++++
>  include/linux/memcontrol.h   | 13 ++-----------
>  include/linux/mmzone.h       | 24 +++++-------------------
>  include/linux/page_counter.h | 13 ++-----------

I'm looking for an obvious and reliable way in which those three
headers include cache.h.  Seems that mm_types.h's inclusion of cache.h
should be sufficient.  Direct inclusion of cache.h would of course be
safest.  I guess if it breaks, we'll hear about it ;)