Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/12] net/mlx4: replace <linux/radix-tree.h> with <linux/radix-tree-root.h>

From: Leon Romanovsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2017 09:10:30 +0300

On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 02:56:56PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> 2017-10-09 3:55 GMT+09:00 Leon Romanovsky <[email-masked]>:
> > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 02:29:15AM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> >> 2017-10-09 2:00 GMT+09:00 David Miller <davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/[email-masked]>:
> >> > From: Masahiro Yamada <[email-masked]>
> >> > Date: Mon,  9 Oct 2017 01:10:11 +0900
> >> >
> >> >> The headers
> >> >>  - include/linux/mlx4/device.h
> >> >>  - drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/mlx4.h
> >> >> require the definition of struct radix_tree_root, but do not need to
> >> >> know anything about other radix tree stuff.
> >> >>
> >> >> Include <linux/radix-tree-root.h> instead of <linux/radix-tree.h> to
> >> >> reduce the header dependency.
> >> >>
> >> >> While we are here, let's add missing <linux/radix-tree.h> where
> >> >> radix tree accessors are used.
> >> >>
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <[email-masked]>
> >> >
> >> > Honestly this makes things more complicated.
> >>
> >>
> >> The idea is simple; include necessary headers explicitly.
> >>
> >> Putting everything into one common header
> >> means most of C files are forced to parse unnecessary headers.
> >
> > It is neglected, only first caller will actually parse that header file,
> > other callers will check the #ifndef pragma without need to reparse the
> > whole file.
> >
>
>
> You completely neglected the point of the discussion.
>
> I am trying to not include unnecessary headers at all.
>

I understand it and have no issues with that, just have hard time to justify for
myself any benefit of doing it.

Thanks

> --
> Best Regards
> Masahiro Yamada