Re: [GIT PULL] sched.h split-up

[Ingo Molnar]

* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 3:33 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > But as mentioned - this is untested. It seems to build, and it looks
> > "ObviouslyCorrect(tm)", but I didn't actually try to boot it.
> 
> Well, it boots, but it's not like there are all that many users of the
> wait_event_interruptible*_locked*() interfaces, so it's dubious that I
> actually exercised the changes all that much (if at all).
> 
> Of course, that's just more reason to *not* have it be some big macro
> expansion in a header file that requires other includes. Basically,
> this interface isn't worth the header inclusion pain.
> 
> And no, I didn't try to see how many
> 
>    #include <linux/sched/signal.h>
> 
> I could try to remove with this.
> 
> But I *did* verify that I could now build that fs/overlayfs/util.c
> file with that #include removed.
> 
> That's the case that caused a semantic merge issue for me - but I
> don't know how many others Ingo added as part of the split-up.

I suspect wait_event_hrtimeout*() has a similar conceptual problem with 
linux/hrtimer.h, because it uses hrtimer APIs but doesn't include the header - but 
fortunately that API variant does not appear to be used much at the moment: only 
fs/aio.c uses wait_event_interruptible_hrtimeout(), but it includes sched.h which 
includes hrtimer.h.

So Ack on your patch.

Also, to be honest I'm also not looking forward to converting 20+ wait_event*() 
macros to a fragile state machine, so I wouldn't mind it if your patch was the 
final solution to this problem! ;-)

Thanks,

	Ingo