On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 11:15 PM, Sarah Sharp <sarah.a.sharp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 07:39:14PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 7:24 PM, Dmitry Kasatkin <d.kasatkin@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Still noone answered me why "drivers/usb/host/xhci-ring.c" does NOT >> include <linux/device.h> (dev_info_ratelimited() and other defines). >> I am expecting that... even I see... >> >> drivers/usb/host/.xhci-ring.o.cmd:715: include/linux/device.h \ >> >> ...where I don't know why this happens. >> >> ( For me this is a bit more important than """trimming""" my >> responses, I keep the history... ) >> >> - Sedat - >> >> P.S.: List of includes in xhci-ring.c >> >> $ grep ^'#include' -nr drivers/usb/host/xhci-ring.c >> 67:#include <linux/scatterlist.h> >> 68:#include <linux/slab.h> >> 69:#include "xhci.h" >> 70:#include "xhci-trace.h" > > Because a header that xhci-ring.c uses includes device.h instead. > > drivers/usb/host/xhci/xhci-ring.c includes > drivers/usb/host/xhci.h which includes > include/linux/usb.h which includes > include/linux/device.h > > All USB host controllers depend on including usb.h, so I don't think > there's a need for the driver to explicitly include device.h. > Thanks for the explanations. On the one hand it is a fine thingie to place include-files at one single place - think of renamed or moved (uapi) include-files. Looking at xhci-ring.c means for me to dig through 3 or 4 files as someone not dealing everyday with USB stuff. What is the effect of CONFIG_DYNAMIC_DEBUG=[y|n] in the affected code? - Sedat - P.S.: The forgotten patch is now in usb-next, but I don't see any credits, coins, gold, platin... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
