Commit graph

3 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Gerard Marull-Paretas 79e6b0e0f6 includes: prefer <zephyr/kernel.h> over <zephyr/zephyr.h>
As of today <zephyr/zephyr.h> is 100% equivalent to <zephyr/kernel.h>.
This patch proposes to then include <zephyr/kernel.h> instead of
<zephyr/zephyr.h> since it is more clear that you are including the
Kernel APIs and (probably) nothing else. <zephyr/zephyr.h> sounds like a
catch-all header that may be confusing. Most applications need to
include a bunch of other things to compile, e.g. driver headers or
subsystem headers like BT, logging, etc.

The idea of a catch-all header in Zephyr is probably not feasible
anyway. Reason is that Zephyr is not a library, like it could be for
example `libpython`. Zephyr provides many utilities nowadays: a kernel,
drivers, subsystems, etc and things will likely grow. A catch-all header
would be massive, difficult to keep up-to-date. It is also likely that
an application will only build a small subset. Note that subsystem-level
headers may use a catch-all approach to make things easier, though.

NOTE: This patch is **NOT** removing the header, just removing its usage
in-tree. I'd advocate for its deprecation (add a #warning on it), but I
understand many people will have concerns.

Signed-off-by: Gerard Marull-Paretas <gerard.marull@nordicsemi.no>
2022-09-05 16:31:47 +02:00
Yuval Peress bf6ca7f2e2 include: Update zephyr.h includes to use zephyr/ prefix
Issue #41543

Signed-off-by: Yuval Peress <peress@google.com>
2022-04-21 07:40:54 -05:00
Yuval Peress 53ef68d459 include: Prefix includes to use a scope
Move include paths and add new target_include_directories to support
backwards compatibility:
* /include -> /include/zephyr
  example: <irq.h> -> <zephyr/irq.h>

Issue #41543

Signed-off-by: Yuval Peress <peress@google.com>
2022-04-08 19:03:32 +02:00
Renamed from include/smf.h (Browse further)