Re: [RFC v2 8/9] uapi: import VFIO header

[David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>]

On Thu, 18 Sept 2025 at 17:17, Stephen Hemminger
<stephen@networkplumber.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2025 10:48:12 +0200
> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
>
> > 06/09/2025 06:11, Stephen Hemminger:
> > > On Wed,  3 Sep 2025 17:17:58 +0200
> > > David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Import VFIO header (from v6.16) to be included in many parts of DPDK.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  kernel/linux/uapi/linux/vfio.h | 1836 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >  kernel/linux/uapi/version      |    2 +-
> > > >  2 files changed, 1837 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >  create mode 100644 kernel/linux/uapi/linux/vfio.h
> > >
> > > The linux kernel source tree has a well defined method for making exported
> > > uapi headers:
> > >     make headers_install
> > >
> > > DPDK should not be inventing its own method for this.
> > >
> > > If you use this on current released kernel (6.16) you will get slightly different file.
> > > The point of having DPDK vfio.h was to workaround case where distro was too old;
> > > not to be different.
> >
> > The diff below is because of a different (but compatible) version.
> > I don't see the point about the method.
>
>
> The reason to use the same method of generating uapi headers
> is then the guard values are the same. If some other header happens
> to include the other vfio.h there will be no problem.

The current script does not align the include guard, that can be fixed.

Now, if the concern is about inclusion of a system installed uapi
header, then using make headers_install is not enough.
We must also ensure that DPDK code includes "our" uapi header first,
otherwise, we will again face issues with (build system) outdated uapi
header.

I'll post a new revision with this change soon.


-- 
David Marchand