From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 234F4C43331 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 16:53:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E038D20825 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 16:53:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="lbxwZdSk" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390388AbfIEQxj (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 12:53:39 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f194.google.com ([209.85.210.194]:37699 "EHLO mail-pf1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728254AbfIEQxi (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 12:53:38 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-f194.google.com with SMTP id y9so2139002pfl.4; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 09:53:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=RWnMjjgITJJqdE2woZBvos5GFZ5W8pugG64G2X+tFzM=; b=lbxwZdSkgDsz8thBfK05SolVFonN7ns0WmIQsha4NqlZij7+w9cC8i3INFtRYbZRhj EZVmNIrGWtUqZAZYANLqTiVo+9NkqO74p/Yivm87vBHoTA4jjeUtfZAKOlhV2eqP2gfT 0EK+OKsuGeXkWrIc37ztsq2d+ZH86hMUatvBzyyA6VAWfZ4R6/Om+LRll2wS7rvx+Wsr s37QR+aMWh9piE6l+t/qFRTNFU4jtzBGmKAibaA1GpomsO3mdfEf+euc7ZISjzN1RTtz VPUNDeWyYxal1zJvbmNq99KqDPDj9TkES+HCLFsjHKTdaHFlpBBlfGN6m3HzhetJq0Sq Rccg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=RWnMjjgITJJqdE2woZBvos5GFZ5W8pugG64G2X+tFzM=; b=BDm0vWGTwooWaRYwcrfoWSFqr4YVhJkjLFgEXhxwiWJC5VtautzBl1BubplV5jP7TH csA6B4ztdw8b7kOVvpDJ0x92zXD5KNvIPJm+jF+fC8+RjslNqxVDyW78+xaXNs/YjKsJ b85f0Yt1b1RXlWjZB2SlmjxtURk5HEMf5lAbPB6Dn9MCsTxiEiYXhPBvMY3e8LZDGVRB IReOP8B+U4RKCCKVn62H56FRmcBrGP/2IARZsKzN5frUGjeZYicQlnzFO+CsGe1IZnOz VaLI5PSz/8GjFbFBR4MrBUSmouYyCTr+s6YE8oAwlocHr83vSKWqgE/5O5rqqeuW468x II7Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXO8ZcMf/aBMZcBCAvkqFVTeyJGwQyCIVWx1IN4L+AxbRYdoEeg WqmimoTXKOBZ6KZZKTA+ncjjPE7U X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxuur0SmCF/3LNMIqDzfUVkMPZT/G5qyihsk72t9YIOjXosGzQm/HCfA8STogqJAbz+dfBRAw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:a611:: with SMTP id c17mr5090767pjq.17.1567702418117; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 09:53:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2600:1700:e321:62f0:329c:23ff:fee3:9d7c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s73sm2684946pjb.15.2019.09.05.09.53.36 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 05 Sep 2019 09:53:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 09:53:35 -0700 From: Guenter Roeck To: Saiyam Doshi Cc: peda@axentia.se, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: muxes: pca9541: use BIT() macro Message-ID: <20190905165335.GA23158@roeck-us.net> References: <20190905131318.GA21280@SD.eic.com> <1d248333-abe9-cff8-ad29-d3b618643dc6@roeck-us.net> <20190905154448.GA3378@SD> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190905154448.GA3378@SD> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 09:15:36PM +0530, Saiyam Doshi wrote: > On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 06:21:06AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > linux/bitops.h should be included when using BIT(). > > It's included from linux/i2c-mux.h and it compiled successfully. > But if it's needed I'll update the patch and resend. > > Just a question - What is the best practice in such case? Should the > header included explicitly? > process/submit-checklist.rst says, as very first point: 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. Guenter