On 21/07/07, Chris Snook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jesper Juhl wrote: > > Hi, > > > > This patch cleans up duplicate includes in > > drivers/net/ > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > --- > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/atl1/atl1_main.c b/drivers/net/atl1/atl1_main.c > > index fd1e156..4a18b88 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/atl1/atl1_main.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/atl1/atl1_main.c > > @@ -75,7 +75,6 @@ > > #include <linux/compiler.h> > > #include <linux/delay.h> > > #include <linux/mii.h> > > -#include <linux/interrupt.h> > > #include <net/checksum.h> > > > > #include <asm/atomic.h> > > Define "duplicate". I ask because this patch just got posted a few days ago: >
duplicate == present more than once in the same source file. Did you try looking at the includes in the source file the patch modifies? > Signed-off-by: Al Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > --- > drivers/net/atl1/atl1_main.c | 1 + > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/atl1/atl1_main.c b/drivers/net/atl1/atl1_main.c > index 4a18b88..fd1e156 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/atl1/atl1_main.c > +++ b/drivers/net/atl1/atl1_main.c > @@ -75,6 +75,7 @@ > #include <linux/compiler.h> > #include <linux/delay.h> > #include <linux/mii.h> > +#include <linux/interrupt.h> > #include <net/checksum.h> > > #include <asm/atomic.h> > > I've always been under the impression that one should include all the files > whose contents you use directly, because other includes that happen to include > them might no longer need to in the future and cease including them. I agree completely. But that's completely beside the point here. Before Al's patch, drivers/net/atl1/atl1_main.c already contained "#include <linux/interrupt.h>". > You can > fight it out with Al if you feel like it. I'm keeping the rest of the CC list > because the other maintainers might have similar feelings about the > appropriateness of these includes in their drivers. > Take a look at the file. These are the includes at the top of drivers/net/atl1/atl1_main.c : ... #include <linux/types.h> #include <linux/netdevice.h> #include <linux/pci.h> #include <linux/spinlock.h> #include <linux/slab.h> #include <linux/string.h> #include <linux/skbuff.h> #include <linux/etherdevice.h> #include <linux/if_vlan.h> #include <linux/irqreturn.h> #include <linux/workqueue.h> #include <linux/timer.h> #include <linux/jiffies.h> #include <linux/hardirq.h> #include <linux/interrupt.h> <--- Here we have linux/interrupt.h #include <linux/irqflags.h> #include <linux/dma-mapping.h> #include <linux/net.h> #include <linux/pm.h> #include <linux/in.h> #include <linux/ip.h> #include <linux/tcp.h> #include <linux/compiler.h> #include <linux/delay.h> #include <linux/mii.h> #include <linux/interrupt.h> <--- And here we include it again. #include <net/checksum.h> #include <asm/atomic.h> #include <asm/byteorder.h> #include "atl1.h" ... Now please tell me why it makes sense to include the same header twice and why my patch that removes the duplicate does not make sense. -- Jesper Juhl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-embedded mailing list [email protected] https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
