Re: [PATCH 1/4] spi: s3c64xx: explicitly include <linux/types.h>

[Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2/6/24 18:02, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 2:52 AM Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> The driver uses u32 and relies on an implicit inclusion of
>> <linux/types.h>.
>>
>> It is good practice to directly include all headers used, it avoids
>> implicit dependencies and spurious breakage if someone rearranges
>> headers and causes the implicit include to vanish.
>>
>> Include the missing header.
>>
>> Fixes: 230d42d422e7 ("spi: Add s3c64xx SPI Controller driver")
> 
> Not sure if Fixes tag is needed here.

We have already talked about this. If a patch that causes the implicit
include to vanish is backported to stable, it will reveal the missing
header here and will result in backporting this patch as well. So, as a
good practice let's allow this patch to be queued to stable, it will
avoid possible compilation errors.

I guess Mark has to break the tie again. Or Greg if he cares, I added
him in To:.

> 
>> Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c | 1 +
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c b/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c
>> index 72c35dbe53b2..c15ca6a910dc 100644
>> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c
>> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c
>> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>>  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>>  #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
>>  #include <linux/spi/spi.h>
>> +#include <linux/types.h>
> 
> Is this really needed for the further patches in this series?
> 

Yes, because in patch 3/4 I use u8 and u16 and I don't want to use those
without having the header included. Do you find this wrong?

>>
>>  #define MAX_SPI_PORTS          12
>>  #define S3C64XX_SPI_QUIRK_CS_AUTO      (1 << 1)
>> --
>> 2.43.0.594.gd9cf4e227d-goog
>>