From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mout-p-202.mailbox.org (mout-p-202.mailbox.org [80.241.56.172]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62B122D94AE for ; Thu, 28 Aug 2025 08:15:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=80.241.56.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756368956; cv=none; b=YCl09DWvD03l6a00eX8HMzDWkEJeGFfQ/Jk1bwB39Zj2QQRdymK7IPUv6a2zxsb7eCbQzoI2TKp29P7qtg/e5QVkrPKwSNiTW1Bzvxs5jh2OSHguHJKTAScMzJ1frQFTTveGRWyT6kZtEYE469yj4jTNWPOHjcDQytaD04VF3OQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756368956; c=relaxed/simple; bh=g6BFsh8A6GJ9PUMZxt3nxah5ekgd0ZK8W1eentIhHKI=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=FVWMZz+27qC3M3pbGnrjcvlrz4baVR06DaYw8OBz0p+WyeYw9N4kj8iR/Qy+XGP2oybrZIC70d2A7h7AM2duIudi93qYweoh2hgN3Db09wqB6UAT2IWg7wCupg9MVqV5qTIMQZ2sbqEQ2ehNgnItHIhKRK5FHhsOM95+9nfUZPQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=mailbox.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mailbox.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mailbox.org header.i=@mailbox.org header.b=Br6pP9j+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=80.241.56.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=mailbox.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mailbox.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mailbox.org header.i=@mailbox.org header.b="Br6pP9j+" Received: from smtp1.mailbox.org (smtp1.mailbox.org [10.196.197.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mout-p-202.mailbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4cCDjx5c4cz9syn; Thu, 28 Aug 2025 10:15:49 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailbox.org; s=mail20150812; t=1756368949; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=g6BFsh8A6GJ9PUMZxt3nxah5ekgd0ZK8W1eentIhHKI=; b=Br6pP9j+HVeHhjZtjfHowQnOU6GxI1VUQGxLdeSaRyvO1wj452x8vZXOmFZobjey9yYyje x9/PclajEwk6t9OQ7s+ozevwV1r6zJ42kNhkLfsoPQvZMnM2bQqyPaImEVx6jJewf1zo5g l1b66KLhJOCjbUoZMw4MeUPHBBTXDkZOy8fFRL0DWxNL0AeNJLVi9Pn1OAHld9hrK9Rr+d 1CfMU83HD51KjFL2d2wsbuwUOlwDPG0kQf7m3GiMPFfgZJffBIW0PA7P+fdSKCznGNTI2r h9LZqe0TBhRHECkqD21yfC2vWIr9fhFzYg+nCPjI9yOgbVHfxai7rFBerMX0vA== Message-ID: <698ebb7319fbdb405dd7f9ddf96d82a7fdd5e023.camel@mailbox.org> Subject: Re: drm/sched/tests: Remove redundant header files From: Philipp Stanner Reply-To: phasta@kernel.org To: Markus Elfring , Philipp Stanner , Liao Yuanhong , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org Cc: LKML , Christian =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6nig?= , Danilo Krummrich , David Airlie , Maarten Lankhorst , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ma=EDra?= Canal , Matthew Brost , Maxime Ripard , Simona Vetter , Thomas Zimmermann , Tvrtko Ursulin Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2025 10:15:44 +0200 In-Reply-To: <697bb91b-24ea-4830-8794-373f709aa37e@web.de> References: <20250819142630.368796-1-liaoyuanhong@vivo.com> <119cb44579d745ad3e47d649e6ee6fea9fd9d146.camel@mailbox.org> <697bb91b-24ea-4830-8794-373f709aa37e@web.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MBO-RS-META: hma6xr6w5t7dfcyo4unzmohy6gz1s15w X-MBO-RS-ID: dc140174502893cec38 On Mon, 2025-08-25 at 12:48 +0200, Markus Elfring wrote: > > > > The header file is already included on line 8. Rem= ove the > > > > redundant include. > > >=20 > > > You would like to omit a duplicate #include directive, don't you? >=20 > The change intention is probably clear. >=20 >=20 > > > Will a corresponding refinement become helpful for the summary phrase > > > and change description? > >=20 > > I don't understand what you mean. Can you elaborate? > >=20 > > Both patch content and description are completely fine as far as I'm co= ncerned. >=20 > How do you think about to distinguish better between the deletion of head= er files > and an adjustment for a repeated preprocessor directive? The patch is very trivial and the commit message is perfectly fine. Applied it to drm-misc-next Thx P. >=20 > Regards, > Markus