Re: [PATCH v3] checkpatch: add --fix option to include linux checks

[Dwaipayan Ray]

> Dwaipayan, can you run this rule from checkpatch.pl on all files in
> the current linux-next tree and share all findings with me?
>
> Maybe, we can fix a few places and improve the rule.
>
> Lukas
>
Hi,
I am actually a bit confused here. I couldn't find any particular place in
documentation which demarcates where to include asm or linux headers.
As far as my understanding, include/linux headers are meant to be
architecture independent.

There are several places in the kernel tree which use the <asm/*> headers.
Checkpatch emits warnings for the following headers in kernel/ :

kernel/dma/swiotlb.c:43:#include <asm/io.h>
kernel/exit.c:69:#include <asm/mmu_context.h>
kernel/fork.c:103:#include <asm/mmu_context.h>
kernel/irq_work.c:21:#include <asm/processor.h>
kernel/module-internal.h:9:#include <asm/module.h>
kernel/module.c:45:#include <asm/mmu_context.h>
kernel/resource.c:27:#include <asm/io.h>
kernel/power/snapshot.c:36:#include <asm/mmu_context.h>
kernel/power/snapshot.c:38:#include <asm/io.h>
kernel/sys.c:73:#include <asm/io.h>
kernel/sysctl.c:78:#include <asm/processor.h>
kernel/sysctl.c:81:#include <asm/nmi.h>
kernel/sysctl.c:83:#include <asm/io.h>
kernel/time/timer.c:52:#include <asm/io.h>

drivers/ had yet a more number of such uses.

I am not entirely sure that changing them will break more stuff or not.
It would be great to have your opinions on this as experienced kernel
programmers.

Thank you,
Dwaipayan.