[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/4] linuxboot_dma: move common functions in a n
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/4] linuxboot_dma: move common functions in a new header
Sat, 12 Jan 2019 19:25:59 +0100
On Fri, Jan 11, 2019 at 6:55 PM Eric Blake <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 1/11/19 11:48 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>>> diff --git a/pc-bios/optionrom/optrom.h b/pc-bios/optionrom/optrom.h
> >>>> new file mode 100644
> >>>> index 0000000000..36f43b43fd
> >>>> --- /dev/null
> >>>> +++ b/pc-bios/optionrom/optrom.h
> >>>> +#include "../../include/standard-headers/linux/qemu_fw_cfg.h"
> >>> This depends on <stdint.h>, please include it first.
> >> Sure.
> >> Thanks,
> >> Stefano
> > Better to just pull in qemu/osdep.h
> Except that qemu/osdep.h should already have been pulled in by whatever
> .c file is including this header. We specifically document that .h files
> shouldn't need to include osdep.h (and in turn, anything that osdep.h
> already pulls in, like <stdint.h>).
Since I can't include qemu/osdep.h because this header file is used by
the option roms (bare metal), do you think is better to include
stdint.h in optrom.h or in the .c files that use it?
As Stefan pointed out, I'm including qemu_fw_cfg.h in optrom.h and it
depends on stdint.h. In this case, what is the best approach?
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/4] optionrom: add new PVH option rom, Stefano Garzarella, 2019/01/11
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/4] hw/i386/pc: use PVH option rom, Stefano Garzarella, 2019/01/11