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

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Arnd,

On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 16:18:10 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 07:58:43 +0200 Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>    
> > 
> > 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).

Any comment?

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Attachment: pgpjH8NIeOBII.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature