Re: [PATCH V2] PCI: rcar: Clean up the macros

[Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>]

On 04/08/2018 06:51 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On 04/08/2018 09:34 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 04/08/2018 05:27 PM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>> On 04/08/2018 06:09 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>> This patch replaces the (1 << n) with BIT(n) and cleans up whitespace,
>>>> no functional change.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut+renesas@gmail.com>
>>>> Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>
>>>> Cc: Phil Edworthy <phil.edworthy@renesas.com>
>>>> Cc: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@verge.net.au>
>>>> Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
>>>> Cc: linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org
>>>> ---
>>>> V2: Reword the commit message
>>>> ---
>>>>  drivers/pci/host/pcie-rcar.c | 52 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
>>>>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pcie-rcar.c b/drivers/pci/host/pcie-rcar.c
>>>> index 25f68305322c..5ab7bf6a8de0 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/host/pcie-rcar.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pcie-rcar.c
>>>> @@ -30,9 +30,9 @@
>>>
>>> missing this:
>>>
>>> #include <linux/bitops.h>
>>
>> This compiles just fine without it though, which means it's probably
>> pulled in through some of the other includes already present.
>>
> 
> I suspected that. However, please see rule #1 in
> Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst:
> 
> 1) If you use a facility then #include the file that defines/declares
>    that facility.  Don't depend on other header files pulling in ones
>    that you use.

If I was to include every single header from which I use something,
wouldn't that make the list real long then ? Is that really worth it?

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut