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: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 09:26:46 +0900 Message-ID: <20140317092646.b696d2245fb95ea8835cbd2e@samsung.com> References: <20140314140129.68a41cc1bd9e0a48a198ca13@samsung.com> <000e01cf3f7b$6edcdfd0$4c969f70$@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-reply-to: 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 On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 17:29:36 +0530, Sachin Kamat wrote: > On 14 March 2014 17:19, Cho KyongHo wrote: > >> 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. > > If it is redundant, then you shouldn't be adding it. If it is > required, then please > mention about the need in the commit description if not a separate patch. > Ok. Thanks for the advice. KyongHo