From: Alejandro Vallejo <agarciav@amd.com>

When later on x86 starts using this file in later patches it won't find
device_tree.h because it's only transitively included by arm.

Make it explicit.

Not a functional change.

Signed-off-by: Alejandro Vallejo <alejandro.garciavallejo@amd.com>
Acked-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
---
 xen/common/device-tree/static-evtchn.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/xen/common/device-tree/static-evtchn.c b/xen/common/device-tree/static-evtchn.c
index 88342b44a1..45cdd664e4 100644
--- a/xen/common/device-tree/static-evtchn.c
+++ b/xen/common/device-tree/static-evtchn.c
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 /* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */
 
 #include <xen/bootfdt.h>
+#include <xen/device_tree.h>
 #include <xen/event.h>
 #include <xen/static-evtchn.h>
 
-- 
2.43.0

On 22.07.2025 13:59, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
> From: Alejandro Vallejo <agarciav@amd.com>
> 
> When later on x86 starts using this file in later patches it won't find
> device_tree.h because it's only transitively included by arm.
> 
> Make it explicit.
> 
> Not a functional change.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Vallejo <alejandro.garciavallejo@amd.com>
> Acked-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@amd.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>

I'm certainly happy to trust you, but on a v1 submission I'm a little
surprised to find two tags present already.

Jan

On Tue Jul 22, 2025 at 2:10 PM CEST, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 22.07.2025 13:59, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
>> From: Alejandro Vallejo <agarciav@amd.com>
>> 
>> When later on x86 starts using this file in later patches it won't find
>> device_tree.h because it's only transitively included by arm.
>> 
>> Make it explicit.
>> 
>> Not a functional change.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Vallejo <alejandro.garciavallejo@amd.com>
>> Acked-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@amd.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
>
> I'm certainly happy to trust you, but on a v1 submission I'm a little
> surprised to find two tags present already.
>
> Jan

They came out of internal review, and I didn't really want to drop them.

Everyone with tags is in CC, as auto-cc "helpfully" does in the absence of
further arguments (for better or worse), so they can pitch in.

If this is a problem, I'll make a note to drop internal tags before public
submissions in the future, and feel very free to ignore these. I do understand
it's important to keep proper paper trail, which, by doing this, is lost.

Cheers,
Alejandro

On Tue, 22 Jul 2025, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
> On Tue Jul 22, 2025 at 2:10 PM CEST, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 22.07.2025 13:59, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
> >> From: Alejandro Vallejo <agarciav@amd.com>
> >> 
> >> When later on x86 starts using this file in later patches it won't find
> >> device_tree.h because it's only transitively included by arm.
> >> 
> >> Make it explicit.
> >> 
> >> Not a functional change.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Alejandro Vallejo <alejandro.garciavallejo@amd.com>
> >> Acked-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@amd.com>
> >> Reviewed-by: Jason Andryuk <jason.andryuk@amd.com>
> >
> > I'm certainly happy to trust you, but on a v1 submission I'm a little
> > surprised to find two tags present already.
> >
> > Jan
> 
> They came out of internal review, and I didn't really want to drop them.

I confirm