Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] Explicitly include linux/major.h where it is needed

[Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1412 bytes --]

Hi Greg,

On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 07:58:43 +0200 Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 09:27:47AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > This is in preparation for removing the include of major.h where it is
> > not needed.
> > 
> > These files were found using
> > 
> > 	grep -E -L '[<"](uapi/)?linux/major\.h' $(git grep -l -w -f /tmp/xx)
> > 
> > where /tmp/xx contains all the symbols defined in major.h.  There were
> > a couple of files in that list that did not need the include since the
> > references are in comments.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>  
> 
> Any reason this had an RFC, but patch 2/2 did not?

I forgot :-)  I added RFC just to hopefully get some attention as this
is just the start of a long slow use of my "spare" time.

> They look good to me, I will be glad to take these, but do you still
> want reviews from others for this?  It seems simple enough to me...

Yeah, well, we all know the simplest patches usually cause the most pain :-)

However, I have been fairly careful and it is an easy include file to
work with.  And I have done my usual build checks, so the linux-next
maintainer won't complain about build problems :-)

I would like to hear from Arnd, at least, as I don't want to step on
his toes (he is having a larger look at our include files).
-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]