On 22 October 2013 11:44, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 07:23:11AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 02:17:52PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: >> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 01:55:02PM +0530, Sachin Kamat wrote: >> > > 'of_match_ptr' is defined in linux/of.h. Include it explicitly to >> > > avoid build breakage in the future. >> > >> > Why, what is going to happen in the "future"? >> > >> > Kernel development is almost always about the "now", who knows what is >> > going to happen later. If you want to make a change that will require >> > this type of file to be included, then do it, and fix things up. >> > >> > Otherwise I'm not going to take this series for things that are not a >> > real problem/issue, sorry. >> >> What happened to the whole "no indirect includes" mentality ? > > That's nice to have, but as nothing is broken at the moment, why is that > an issue here? Right, nothing is broken at the moment. This series is more of making the code adhere to better coding style (avoiding implicit includes). Kind of semantic fix :) -- With warm regards, Sachin -- 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
