On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 09:44:04AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > On Thu, 19 Jun 2014, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 03:52:51PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > +#include <linux/clk.h> > > > +#include <linux/math64.h> > > > +#include <linux/module.h> > > > +#include <linux/of.h> > > > +#include <linux/platform_device.h> > > > +#include <linux/pwm.h> > > > +#include <linux/regmap.h> > > > +#include <linux/slab.h> > > > +#include <linux/mfd/syscon.h> > > > +#include <linux/time.h> > > > > These should be sorted alphabetically. > > Really? :) Yes, as a general rule, for two reasons: - It helps to reduce conflicts when two people add two different header files at a later date (provided they don't ignore the sorting and add them both at the end of the list.) - It helps reduce the chance of having the same include listed twice (sometimes silently caused at git merge time) since it means if two people independently add the same include in the same place in the list, git will cope. Eg, if one adds an include in one random place in the list, and someone else adds the same in another random place in the list, the result will be two includes of the same file. If they're sufficiently far apart, git will not flag a conflict. -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... slowly improving, and getting towards what was expected from it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
