From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Cho KyongHo Subject: RE: [PATCH v11 01/27] iommu/exynos: do not include removed header Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 20:49:18 +0900 Message-ID: <000e01cf3f7b$6edcdfd0$4c969f70$@samsung.com> References: <20140314140129.68a41cc1bd9e0a48a198ca13@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-reply-to: Content-language: ko List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org Errors-To: iommu-bounces-cunTk1MwBs9QetFLy7KEm3xJsTq8ys+cHZ5vskTnxNA@public.gmane.org To: 'Sachin Kamat' Cc: 'Linux DeviceTree' , 'Linux Samsung SOC' , 'Prathyush' , 'Grant Grundler' , 'Linux Kernel' , 'Linux IOMMU' , 'Kukjin Kim' , 'Sylwester Nawrocki' , 'Varun Sethi' , 'Antonios Motakis' , 'Tomasz Figa' , 'Linux ARM Kernel' , 'Rahul Sharma' List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org > From: Sachin Kamat [mailto:sachin.kamat-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org] > Sent: Friday, March 14, 2014 7:00 PM > > On 14 March 2014 10:31, Cho KyongHo wrote: > > Commit 25e9d28d92 (ARM: EXYNOS: remove system mmu initialization from > > exynos tree) removed arch/arm/mach-exynos/mach/sysmmu.h header without > > removing remaining use of it from exynos-iommu driver, thus causing a > > compilation error. > > > > This patch fixes the error by removing respective include line > > from exynos-iommu.c. > > > > CC: Tomasz Figa > > Signed-off-by: Cho KyongHo > > --- > > drivers/iommu/exynos-iommu.c | 3 +-- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/iommu/exynos-iommu.c b/drivers/iommu/exynos-iommu.c > > index 0740189..4876d35 100644 > > --- a/drivers/iommu/exynos-iommu.c > > +++ b/drivers/iommu/exynos-iommu.c > > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ > > #define DEBUG > > #endif > > > > +#include > > This change doesn't look related to the patch subject/description. > Yes. But it is simply added without any side-effect. Do you think it should be in a separate patch?. Actually, the added line is a redundant. Regards, KyongHo.