On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 04:31:37PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote: > On Sat 2023-08-05 20:50:25, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > Sorting headers alphabetically helps locating duplicates, and > > make it easier to figure out where to insert new headers. > > I agree that includes become a mess after some time. But I am > not persuaded that sorting them alphabetically in random source > files help anything. > > Is this part of some grand plan for the entire kernel, please? > Is this outcome from some particular discussion? > Will this become a well know rule checked by checkpatch.pl? > > I am personally not going to reject patches because of wrongly > sorted headers unless there is some real plan behind it. > > I agree that it might look better. An inverse Christmas' tree > also looks better. But it does not mean that it makes the life > easier. It does from my point of view as maintainability is increased. > The important things are still hidden in the details > (every single line). > > From my POV, this patch would just create a mess in the git > history and complicate backporting. > > I am sorry but I will not accept this patch unless there > is a wide consensus that this makes sense. Your choice, of course, But I see in practice dup headers being added, or some unrelated ones left untouched because header list mess, and in those cases sorting can help (a bit) in my opinion. TL;DR: I was tolerating unsorted mess (for really long header inclusion block) up to the point when I realized how it helps people to maintain the code. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
