diff for duplicates of <1460722116.3025.40.camel@synopsys.com> diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt index 1107bce..c0a96c2 100644 --- a/a/1.txt +++ b/N1/1.txt @@ -1,12 +1,11 @@ -Hi Stephen, +Hi?Stephen, -On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 15:03 -0700, sboyd@codeaurora.org wrote: +On Mon, 2016-04-11@15:03 -0700, sboyd@codeaurora.org wrote: > On 04/11, Alexey Brodkin wrote: -> >=20 -> > On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 11:41 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote: -> > >=20 -> > > + * warranty of any kind, whether express or implied= -. +> > +> > On Mon, 2016-04-11@11:41 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote: +> > > +> > > + * warranty of any kind, whether express or implied. > > > + */ > > > + > > > +#include <linux/platform_device.h> @@ -14,16 +13,14 @@ On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 15:03 -0700, sboyd@codeaurora.org wrote: > > > +#include <linux/clk-provider.h> > > > +#include <linux/err.h> > > > +#include <linux/device.h> -> > "linux/platform_device.h" includes "linux/devic= -e.h" so you may make this list of headers +> > "linux/platform_device.h" includes "linux/device.h" so you may make this list of headers > > a little bit shorter. -> >=20 -> > >=20 +> > +> > > > > > +#include <linux/of_address.h> > > > +#include <linux/slab.h> > > > +#include <linux/of.h> -> > "linux/of_address.h" already includes "linux/of= -.h". +> > "linux/of_address.h" already includes "linux/of.h". > It's ok to include things twice. In fact, its better to avoid any > implicit includes so that if we ever want to remove includes from > other headers we can do so without disturbing this driver. @@ -32,12 +29,10 @@ IMHO approach with minimal amount of headers is nice just because it's easier to check if everything is in place. I mean attempt to compile will immediately reveal a missing header. -So that's what I do - I remove as many inclusions as I may until stuff comp= -iles. +So that's what I do - I remove as many inclusions as I may until stuff compiles. But with approach of explicit inclusion it's much easier to include -much more headers than really needed. The only way to figure out if header = -is really +much more headers than really needed. The only way to figure out if header is really required is to manually check all used functions in the current source which is way too unreliable and probably nobody will do it ever anyways. And that's how we'll get more stale and pointless inclusions. diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest index 47dfe8b..ede5ec2 100644 --- a/a/content_digest +++ b/N1/content_digest @@ -1,30 +1,20 @@ "ref\050c75be8ecab225a1dd49628a173d211a02755b2.1459791946.git.joabreu@synopsys.com\0" "ref\01460393270.5119.20.camel@synopsys.com\0" "ref\020160411220320.GB14441@codeaurora.org\0" - "From\0Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@synopsys.com>\0" - "Subject\0Re: [RESEND PATCH v4] clk/axs10x: Add I2S PLL clock driver\0" + "From\0Alexey.Brodkin@synopsys.com (Alexey Brodkin)\0" + "Subject\0[RESEND PATCH v4] clk/axs10x: Add I2S PLL clock driver\0" "Date\0Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:08:37 +0000\0" - "To\0sboyd@codeaurora.org <sboyd@codeaurora.org>\0" - "Cc\0linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>" - robh+dt@kernel.org <robh+dt@kernel.org> - mturquette@baylibre.com <mturquette@baylibre.com> - Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com> - devicetree@vger.kernel.org <devicetree@vger.kernel.org> - linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org <linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org> - CARLOS.PALMINHA@synopsys.com <CARLOS.PALMINHA@synopsys.com> - Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com <Jose.Abreu@synopsys.com> - " linux-clk@vger.kernel.org <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>\0" + "To\0linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org\0" "\00:1\0" "b\0" - "Hi\302\240Stephen,\n" + "Hi?Stephen,\n" "\n" - "On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 15:03 -0700, sboyd@codeaurora.org wrote:\n" + "On Mon, 2016-04-11@15:03 -0700, sboyd@codeaurora.org wrote:\n" "> On 04/11, Alexey Brodkin wrote:\n" - "> >=20\n" - "> > On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 11:41 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:\n" - "> > >=20\n" - "> > > + * warranty of any kind, whether express or implied=\n" - ".\n" + "> > \n" + "> > On Mon, 2016-04-11@11:41 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:\n" + "> > > \n" + "> > > + * warranty of any kind, whether express or implied.\n" "> > > + */\n" "> > > +\n" "> > > +#include <linux/platform_device.h>\n" @@ -32,16 +22,14 @@ "> > > +#include <linux/clk-provider.h>\n" "> > > +#include <linux/err.h>\n" "> > > +#include <linux/device.h>\n" - "> > \"linux/platform_device.h\" includes \"linux/devic=\n" - "e.h\" so you may make this list of headers\n" + "> > \"linux/platform_device.h\" includes \"linux/device.h\" so you may make this list of headers\n" "> > a little bit shorter.\n" - "> >=20\n" - "> > >=20\n" + "> > \n" + "> > > \n" "> > > +#include <linux/of_address.h>\n" "> > > +#include <linux/slab.h>\n" "> > > +#include <linux/of.h>\n" - "> > \"linux/of_address.h\" already includes \"linux/of=\n" - ".h\".\n" + "> > \"linux/of_address.h\" already includes \"linux/of.h\".\n" "> It's ok to include things twice. In fact, its better to avoid any\n" "> implicit includes so that if we ever want to remove includes from\n" "> other headers we can do so without disturbing this driver.\n" @@ -50,16 +38,14 @@ "it's easier to check if everything is in place. I mean attempt to compile\n" "will immediately reveal a missing header.\n" "\n" - "So that's what I do - I remove as many inclusions as I may until stuff comp=\n" - "iles.\n" + "So that's what I do - I remove as many inclusions as I may until stuff compiles.\n" "\n" "But with approach of explicit inclusion it's much easier to include\n" - "much more headers than really needed. The only way to figure out if header =\n" - "is really\n" + "much more headers than really needed. The only way to figure out if header is really\n" "required is to manually check all used functions in the current source\n" "which is way too unreliable and probably nobody will do it ever anyways.\n" "And that's how we'll get more stale and pointless inclusions.\n" "\n" -Alexey -df5a96af9c2686dc7bba8636608ca9dbd1a1c8686c6fc69fe01b4528c7d0a53f +c5f075ba3c9fbab4b67c23117ba0f696752a0ea03a3be7611aea5add26cd638d
diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N2/1.txt index 1107bce..6535e1a 100644 --- a/a/1.txt +++ b/N2/1.txt @@ -2,11 +2,10 @@ Hi Stephen, On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 15:03 -0700, sboyd@codeaurora.org wrote: > On 04/11, Alexey Brodkin wrote: -> >=20 +> > > > On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 11:41 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote: -> > >=20 -> > > + * warranty of any kind, whether express or implied= -. +> > > +> > > + * warranty of any kind, whether express or implied. > > > + */ > > > + > > > +#include <linux/platform_device.h> @@ -14,16 +13,14 @@ On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 15:03 -0700, sboyd@codeaurora.org wrote: > > > +#include <linux/clk-provider.h> > > > +#include <linux/err.h> > > > +#include <linux/device.h> -> > "linux/platform_device.h" includes "linux/devic= -e.h" so you may make this list of headers +> > "linux/platform_device.h" includes "linux/device.h" so you may make this list of headers > > a little bit shorter. -> >=20 -> > >=20 +> > +> > > > > > +#include <linux/of_address.h> > > > +#include <linux/slab.h> > > > +#include <linux/of.h> -> > "linux/of_address.h" already includes "linux/of= -.h". +> > "linux/of_address.h" already includes "linux/of.h". > It's ok to include things twice. In fact, its better to avoid any > implicit includes so that if we ever want to remove includes from > other headers we can do so without disturbing this driver. @@ -32,12 +29,10 @@ IMHO approach with minimal amount of headers is nice just because it's easier to check if everything is in place. I mean attempt to compile will immediately reveal a missing header. -So that's what I do - I remove as many inclusions as I may until stuff comp= -iles. +So that's what I do - I remove as many inclusions as I may until stuff compiles. But with approach of explicit inclusion it's much easier to include -much more headers than really needed. The only way to figure out if header = -is really +much more headers than really needed. The only way to figure out if header is really required is to manually check all used functions in the current source which is way too unreliable and probably nobody will do it ever anyways. And that's how we'll get more stale and pointless inclusions. diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N2/content_digest index 47dfe8b..5830238 100644 --- a/a/content_digest +++ b/N2/content_digest @@ -20,11 +20,10 @@ "\n" "On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 15:03 -0700, sboyd@codeaurora.org wrote:\n" "> On 04/11, Alexey Brodkin wrote:\n" - "> >=20\n" + "> > \n" "> > On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 11:41 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:\n" - "> > >=20\n" - "> > > + * warranty of any kind, whether express or implied=\n" - ".\n" + "> > > \n" + "> > > + * warranty of any kind, whether express or implied.\n" "> > > + */\n" "> > > +\n" "> > > +#include <linux/platform_device.h>\n" @@ -32,16 +31,14 @@ "> > > +#include <linux/clk-provider.h>\n" "> > > +#include <linux/err.h>\n" "> > > +#include <linux/device.h>\n" - "> > \"linux/platform_device.h\" includes \"linux/devic=\n" - "e.h\" so you may make this list of headers\n" + "> > \"linux/platform_device.h\" includes \"linux/device.h\" so you may make this list of headers\n" "> > a little bit shorter.\n" - "> >=20\n" - "> > >=20\n" + "> > \n" + "> > > \n" "> > > +#include <linux/of_address.h>\n" "> > > +#include <linux/slab.h>\n" "> > > +#include <linux/of.h>\n" - "> > \"linux/of_address.h\" already includes \"linux/of=\n" - ".h\".\n" + "> > \"linux/of_address.h\" already includes \"linux/of.h\".\n" "> It's ok to include things twice. In fact, its better to avoid any\n" "> implicit includes so that if we ever want to remove includes from\n" "> other headers we can do so without disturbing this driver.\n" @@ -50,16 +47,14 @@ "it's easier to check if everything is in place. I mean attempt to compile\n" "will immediately reveal a missing header.\n" "\n" - "So that's what I do - I remove as many inclusions as I may until stuff comp=\n" - "iles.\n" + "So that's what I do - I remove as many inclusions as I may until stuff compiles.\n" "\n" "But with approach of explicit inclusion it's much easier to include\n" - "much more headers than really needed. The only way to figure out if header =\n" - "is really\n" + "much more headers than really needed. The only way to figure out if header is really\n" "required is to manually check all used functions in the current source\n" "which is way too unreliable and probably nobody will do it ever anyways.\n" "And that's how we'll get more stale and pointless inclusions.\n" "\n" -Alexey -df5a96af9c2686dc7bba8636608ca9dbd1a1c8686c6fc69fe01b4528c7d0a53f +584a5449e73cf14d1e2a771de8381d8dee9f20bc7a1d055dbd89ee4bd9b5ea92
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.