On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 07:41:55PM +0200, Raag Jadav wrote: > On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 06:11:16PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2025, at 16:25, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 12:37:45PM +0530, Raag Jadav wrote: > > >> This series attempts to cleanup io.h with "include what you use" approach. > > >> This depends on changes available on immutable tag[1]. > > >> > > >> Although this series is too trivial in the grand scheme of things, it is > > >> still a tiny step towards untangling core headers. I have success results > > >> from LKP for this series but there can still be corner cases. So perhaps > > >> we can queue this on a temporary branch which we can use to submit fixes > > >> in case of fallout. > > >> > > >> Future plan is to use the excellent analysis[2][3] by Arnd to cleanup other > > >> headers. > > >> > > >> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/Z7xGpz3Q4Zj6YHx7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > >> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/r/2342b516-2c6e-42e5-b4f4-579b280823ba@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > >> [3] https://lore.kernel.org/r/f6eb011b-40fb-409a-b2b2-a09d0e770bbd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > > > I believe Arnd can take it through his tree for headers as DRM part is > > > Acked already. > > > > I've applied it yesterday and not seen any regression reports so far. > > Probably because the immutable tag is already in -next? Is there any? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
