From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Emil Goode Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/tegra: Include header drm/drm.h Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 11:49:22 +0200 Message-ID: <20130427094922.GA6348@debian> References: <1366998591-8508-1-git-send-email-emilgoode@gmail.com> <20130426192208.GA2945@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130426192208.GA2945-RM9K5IK7kjIQXX3q8xo1gnVAuStQJXxyR5q1nwbD4aMs9pC9oP6+/A@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Thierry Reding Cc: airlied-cv59FeDIM0c@public.gmane.org, swarren-3lzwWm7+Weoh9ZMKESR00Q@public.gmane.org, dri-devel-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW@public.gmane.org, linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, kernel-janitors-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org Hi Thierry, I don't know this code well but the drm/drm.h has an #if def so that either linux/types.h is included or the __[us]* types are defined in a different way with the comment "One of the BSDs". Also I sent a patch last year to include linux/types.h in exynos_drm.h but it now includes drm/drm.h instead. Best regards, Emil Goode On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 09:22:08PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 07:49:51PM +0200, Emil Goode wrote: > > Include definitions of used types by including drm/drm.h > > > > Sparse output: > > /usr/include/drm/tegra_drm.h:21: > > found __[us]{8,16,32,64} type without > > #include > > > > Signed-off-by: Emil Goode > > --- > > include/uapi/drm/tegra_drm.h | 2 ++ > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/include/uapi/drm/tegra_drm.h b/include/uapi/drm/tegra_drm.h > > index 6e132a2..73bde4e 100644 > > --- a/include/uapi/drm/tegra_drm.h > > +++ b/include/uapi/drm/tegra_drm.h > > @@ -17,6 +17,8 @@ > > #ifndef _UAPI_TEGRA_DRM_H_ > > #define _UAPI_TEGRA_DRM_H_ > > > > +#include > > + > > sparse complains about linux/types.h not being included, so I wonder if > it makes more sense to include that instead of drm/drm.h. In fact I have > a fix that does exactly that in a local branch and was going to put that > into my fixes branch. It's a bit more lightweight. > > On the other hand, some drivers already include drm/drm.h in the public > header so I don't really have any objections to this patch. > > Thierry