| Message ID | 1471965498-7824-1-git-send-email-weiyj.lk@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@gmail.com> writes:
> Remove duplicated include.
How so duplicated ? Can you elaborate please ?
Moreover, how do you do think symbol_get() can stay in spitz.c without having
this include ?
Cheers.
--
Robert
Hi Robert, On 08/24/2016 12:24 AM, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@gmail.com> writes: > >> Remove duplicated include. > How so duplicated ? Can you elaborate please ? > > Moreover, how do you do think symbol_get() can stay in spitz.c without having > this include ? file linux/module.h included twice as following: #include <linux/kernel.h> #include <linux/module.h> /* symbol_get ; symbol_put */ ... #include <linux/module.h> So I think we can remove the dup include. Regards, Wei Yongjun
Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@gmail.com> writes: > Hi Robert, > On 08/24/2016 12:24 AM, Robert Jarzmik wrote: >> Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> Remove duplicated include. >> How so duplicated ? Can you elaborate please ? >> >> Moreover, how do you do think symbol_get() can stay in spitz.c without having >> this include ? > > file linux/module.h included twice as following: > > #include <linux/kernel.h> > #include <linux/module.h> /* symbol_get ; symbol_put */ > ... > #include <linux/module.h> > > So I think we can remove the dup include. Ah I see it now. What you really mean is that you want to revert 12beb346710b ("Merge tag 'pxa-fixes-v4.8' of https://github.com/rjarzmik/linux into randconfig-4.8"), because : - I wasn't carefull enough at review time of https://github.com/rjarzmik/linux/commit/5351ca4e70f30e0175265fbf98691528b9a4e990 https://github.com/rjarzmik/linux/commit/a3c747b96df66a7eb810fef45f3b9e65614712d9 - and because Paul wasn't very carefull when we look at : 73017a542fd2 ("arm: fix implicit module.h users by adding it to arch/arm as required.") So all in all, I'd prefer a revert with Paul's ack please. And this time I'll go through my pxa/for-next tree, I was a fool to put that in pxa/fixes. Cheers.
[Re: [PATCH -next] ARM: pxa: remove duplicated include from spitz.c] On 23/08/2016 (Tue 19:20) Robert Jarzmik wrote: > Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@gmail.com> writes: > > > Hi Robert, > > On 08/24/2016 12:24 AM, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > >> Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@gmail.com> writes: > >> > >>> Remove duplicated include. > >> How so duplicated ? Can you elaborate please ? > >> > >> Moreover, how do you do think symbol_get() can stay in spitz.c without having > >> this include ? > > > > file linux/module.h included twice as following: > > > > #include <linux/kernel.h> > > #include <linux/module.h> /* symbol_get ; symbol_put */ > > ... > > #include <linux/module.h> > > > > So I think we can remove the dup include. > > Ah I see it now. > > What you really mean is that you want to revert 12beb346710b ("Merge tag > 'pxa-fixes-v4.8' of https://github.com/rjarzmik/linux into randconfig-4.8"), > because : > - I wasn't carefull enough at review time of > https://github.com/rjarzmik/linux/commit/5351ca4e70f30e0175265fbf98691528b9a4e990 > https://github.com/rjarzmik/linux/commit/a3c747b96df66a7eb810fef45f3b9e65614712d9 > > - and because Paul wasn't very carefull when we look at : > 73017a542fd2 ("arm: fix implicit module.h users by adding it to arch/arm as > required.") > > So all in all, I'd prefer a revert with Paul's ack please. So if possible, please drop the duplicate module.h w/o the comment vs. a revert. Since it appeared as a pseudo merge and was not my original commit anyway, this shouldn't be a problem I hope... You can call it careless if you want, I won't be offended -- FWIW I was juggling several different streams; one to audit and remove apparently non-required inclusions of module.h and one to unwind the implicit gpio inclusion presence before trying to pave the way to fixing _that_ last minute for 4.8; it was mixing and testing the two simulatenously that led to the removal and re-addition; which when separating out the latter caused it to become a duplicate additon as reported above. Not an excuse; just one of those happenstance corner cases. I'd since fixed the dup locally and added this to my automated testing: make includecheck |sort > /tmp/pre-include.txt <...apply all WIP patches> make includecheck |sort > /tmp/post-include.txt diff -u /tmp/pre-include.txt /tmp/post-include.txt > /tmp/inc-delta.txt if [ -s /tmp/inc-delta.txt ]; then echo redundant includes changed. cat /tmp/inc-delta.txt fi > And this time I'll go through my pxa/for-next tree, I was a fool to > put that in pxa/fixes. Well, you were not a fool - the fault is mine if it belongs to anyone. You made a sensible call based on what I wrote in the commit log. Fortunately it is 100% harmless and if you want to clean it up locally and do so ASAP, then no problem -- do it and consider it Ack'd. Thanks, Paul. -- > > Cheers. > > -- Robert
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/spitz.c b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/spitz.c index 2c150bf..67d66c7 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/spitz.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/spitz.c @@ -31,7 +31,6 @@ #include <linux/input/matrix_keypad.h> #include <linux/regulator/machine.h> #include <linux/io.h> -#include <linux/module.h> #include <linux/reboot.h> #include <linux/memblock.h>
Remove duplicated include. Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@gmail.com> --- arch/arm/mach-pxa/spitz.c | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)