From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Rothwell Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] Explicitly include linux/major.h where it is needed Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 14:25:12 +1000 Message-ID: <20200622142512.702bdc68@canb.auug.org.au> References: <20200617092614.7897ccb2@canb.auug.org.au> <20200617092747.0cadb2de@canb.auug.org.au> <20200617055843.GB25631@kroah.com> <20200617161810.256ff93f@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/4E7sxZ+o7+5.7k+KqzAJoZd"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256 Return-path: Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org ([203.11.71.1]:40997 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725943AbgFVEZQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2020 00:25:16 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20200617161810.256ff93f@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Greg KH , Linux-kernel Mailing List , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org --Sig_/4E7sxZ+o7+5.7k+KqzAJoZd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Arnd, On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 16:18:10 +1000 Stephen Rothwell = wrote: > > On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 07:58:43 +0200 Greg KH w= rote: > > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 09:27:47AM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: =20 > > > This is in preparation for removing the include of major.h where it is > > > not needed. > > >=20 > > > These files were found using > > >=20 > > > grep -E -L '[<"](uapi/)?linux/major\.h' $(git grep -l -w -f /tmp/xx) > > >=20 > > > 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. > > >=20 > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell =20 > >=20 > > Any reason this had an RFC, but patch 2/2 did not? =20 >=20 > 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. >=20 > > 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... =20 >=20 > Yeah, well, we all know the simplest patches usually cause the most pain = :-) >=20 > 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 :-) >=20 > 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). Any comment? --=20 Cheers, Stephen Rothwell --Sig_/4E7sxZ+o7+5.7k+KqzAJoZd Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENIC96giZ81tWdLgKAVBC80lX0GwFAl7wMqgACgkQAVBC80lX 0GxoIAf+KqJYIQ6vTc/0E/3RWnBpf5RrYu0GH9BW7ka5MpfFK4pMfzJzcpt2TWeL O6efiNJ/SyHHA5BpeNsO/PLaYQH1uuXrOndVYqDzgC+9tOXzNNcg/QMbjV6R1krq VzdB0kRGcNvEO2dvHPVJeon6/CYuQsG4+TJKX80scHRRF0ASD6xE9WeiT9pIUlUB NUnjCkkVvYZnBJ+xkgwObQDlwCyODwQd0pgwQnsv/JC8+mOBvK79bxzWAoVQILai 5mZOAn6Y/dyQyt8IITo4s3bcSLRr/W3bGFcS90h8aKdBc4xp3olDQAMnxJrUp+gn FAFRytt45UvyyiVGypIKzFMcHadQAg== =dZlI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/4E7sxZ+o7+5.7k+KqzAJoZd--