[merged] bitfield-add-explicit-inclusions-to-the-example.patch removed from -mm tree

[merged] bitfield-add-explicit-inclusions-to-the-example.patch removed from -mm tree

[Andrew Morton]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1722 bytes --]


The patch titled
     Subject: bitfield: add explicit inclusions to the example
has been removed from the -mm tree.  Its filename was
     bitfield-add-explicit-inclusions-to-the-example.patch

This patch was dropped because it was merged into mainline or a subsystem tree

------------------------------------------------------
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Subject: bitfield: add explicit inclusions to the example

It's not obvious that bitfield.h doesn't guarantee the bits.h inclusion
and the example in the former is confusing.  Some developers think that
it's okay to just include bitfield.h to get it working.  Change example to
explicitly include necessary headers in order to avoid confusion.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220207123341.47533-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com
Fixes: 3e9b3112ec74 ("add basic register-field manipulation macros")
Depends-on: 8bd9cb51daac ("locking/atomics, asm-generic: Move some macros from <linux/bitops.h> to a new <linux/bits.h> file")
Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Reported-by: Jan Dąbroś <jsd@semihalf.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---

 include/linux/bitfield.h |    3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

--- a/include/linux/bitfield.h~bitfield-add-explicit-inclusions-to-the-example
+++ a/include/linux/bitfield.h
@@ -19,6 +19,9 @@
  *
  * Example:
  *
+ *  #include <linux/bitfield.h>
+ *  #include <linux/bits.h>
+ *
  *  #define REG_FIELD_A  GENMASK(6, 0)
  *  #define REG_FIELD_B  BIT(7)
  *  #define REG_FIELD_C  GENMASK(15, 8)
_

Patches currently in -mm which might be from andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com are