Re: swiotlb: remove duplicated #include

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> * FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>>
>>   
>>>> In a few days, but wanted to hear back from either Jeremy or Becky  
>>>> first about how well they actually work in their usecases.
>>>>       
>>> Well, you don't need to wait, I think.
>>>
>>> All Jeremy and Becky need is adding highmem support to swiotlb. How 
>>> we support it doesn't matter. We can choose better one.
>>>
>>> We all (including Jeremy) agreed that Becky's physical address scheme 
>>> is better (simpler) than Jeremy's struct page and offset scheme. 
>>> Surely, Becky's scheme works for Xen and him (Jeremy said that he 
>>> tested it lightly).
>>>     
>>
>> Jeremy said, when he submitted this series, shortly before Christmas:
>>
>>  >> Here's a work in progress series [...]
>>  >>
>>  >> Quick testing showed no problems, but I haven't had the chance to 
>> do  >> anything extensive.
>>
>> Jeremy, did you have a chance to do more testing with the current  
>> tip/master bits on Xen, so that we can push it to Linus?
>>   
>
> I'm going to be on vacation until the 12th, so I won't have a chance to 
> do anything until then (perhaps Ian will have a chance to poke at them 
> before then).  I'm expecting Becky's patches to work as-is, or if not, 
> be easily fixed with a couple of small bugfix patches.  So I say go 
> ahead if they work for everyone else.

ok, i have put it into the to-Linus pile.

	Ingo