[V19,1/7] i2c: tegra: sort all the include headers alphabetically

Message ID 1549998408-9137-1-git-send-email-skomatineni@nvidia.com
State Accepted
Headers show
Series
  • [V19,1/7] i2c: tegra: sort all the include headers alphabetically
Related show

Commit Message

Sowjanya Komatineni Feb. 12, 2019, 7:06 p.m.
This patch sorts all the include headers alphabetically for the
I2C Tegra driver.

Acked-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@nvidia.com>
---
 [V9/V10/V11/V12/V13/V14/V15/V16/V17/V18/V19] : Rebased to 5.0-rc4
 [V3/V4/V5/V7/V8] : Removed unsued headers in tegra I2C
 [V2] 		  : Added this in V2 to sort the headers in tegra I2C



 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c | 19 ++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

Comments

Peter Rosin Feb. 12, 2019, 9 p.m. | #1
On 2019-02-12 20:06, Sowjanya Komatineni wrote:
> This patch sorts all the include headers alphabetically for the
> I2C Tegra driver.
> 
> Acked-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@nvidia.com>
> ---
>  [V9/V10/V11/V12/V13/V14/V15/V16/V17/V18/V19] : Rebased to 5.0-rc4
>  [V3/V4/V5/V7/V8] : Removed unsued headers in tegra I2C

"^ Header removal should be mentioned in the commit message, I think."
- Wolfram Sang [0]

Cheers,
Peter

[0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/2/11/375
Dmitry Osipenko Feb. 12, 2019, 9:15 p.m. | #2
13.02.2019 0:00, Peter Rosin пишет:
> On 2019-02-12 20:06, Sowjanya Komatineni wrote:
>> This patch sorts all the include headers alphabetically for the
>> I2C Tegra driver.
>>
>> Acked-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@nvidia.com>
>> ---
>>  [V9/V10/V11/V12/V13/V14/V15/V16/V17/V18/V19] : Rebased to 5.0-rc4
>>  [V3/V4/V5/V7/V8] : Removed unsued headers in tegra I2C
> 
> "^ Header removal should be mentioned in the commit message, I think."
> - Wolfram Sang [0]
> 
> Cheers,
> Peter
> 
> [0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/2/11/375
> 

It could make sense to adjust the comment only if there will be anything else worthwhile a new revision, otherwise it is not-so-important.
Wolfram Sang Feb. 13, 2019, 8:35 a.m. | #3
> > "^ Header removal should be mentioned in the commit message, I think."
> > - Wolfram Sang [0]
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> > 
> > [0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/2/11/375
> > 
> 
> It could make sense to adjust the comment only if there will be
> anything else worthwhile a new revision, otherwise it is
> not-so-important. 

Not quite. Addressing review comments and proper commit messages are
both important. So, it needs to be fixed. Yes, I can fix this small
issue locally here (and I will do this, so no need to resend), but this
is ultimately my decision (which you can surely ask for but not
rely on).

I'll apply this series later today.
Dmitry Osipenko Feb. 13, 2019, 1:13 p.m. | #4
13.02.2019 11:35, Wolfram Sang пишет:
> 
>>> "^ Header removal should be mentioned in the commit message, I think."
>>> - Wolfram Sang [0]
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> [0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/2/11/375
>>>
>>
>> It could make sense to adjust the comment only if there will be
>> anything else worthwhile a new revision, otherwise it is
>> not-so-important. 
> 
> Not quite. Addressing review comments and proper commit messages are
> both important. So, it needs to be fixed. Yes, I can fix this small
> issue locally here (and I will do this, so no need to resend), but this
> is ultimately my decision (which you can surely ask for but not
> rely on).
> 
> I'll apply this series later today.
> 

Fixing up minor itches while applying patches is the right approach, thank you!
Wolfram Sang Feb. 13, 2019, 2:55 p.m. | #5
> Fixing up minor itches while applying patches is the right approach,
> thank you!

It often is. But making a dogma out of it goes nowhere for me.
Sowjanya Komatineni Feb. 13, 2019, 11:45 p.m. | #6
> > Fixing up minor itches while applying patches is the right approach, 
> > thank you!
>
> It often is. But making a dogma out of it goes nowhere for me.

Sorry, somehow I looked at your 2nd reply for this patch-1 of V19 about having few comments to take care in this series but missed to view your 1st reply to same patch-1 of V19.
Fixed my mail view so will not miss next time.

Appreciate if you can help fix the comment while applying patches.

Thanks a lot
Sowjanya
Wolfram Sang Feb. 14, 2019, 4:51 p.m. | #7
> Appreciate if you can help fix the comment while applying patches.

You are welcome, Sowjanya.
Wolfram Sang Feb. 14, 2019, 4:51 p.m. | #8
On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 11:06:42AM -0800, Sowjanya Komatineni wrote:
> This patch sorts all the include headers alphabetically for the
> I2C Tegra driver.
> 
> Acked-by: Thierry Reding <treding@nvidia.com>
> Reviewed-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@nvidia.com>

Whole series applied to for-next, thanks!

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c
index c77adbbea0c7..79c6aa87499b 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-tegra.c
@@ -6,24 +6,21 @@ 
  * Author: Colin Cross <ccross@android.com>
  */
 
-#include <linux/kernel.h>
-#include <linux/init.h>
-#include <linux/platform_device.h>
 #include <linux/clk.h>
+#include <linux/delay.h>
 #include <linux/err.h>
 #include <linux/i2c.h>
-#include <linux/io.h>
+#include <linux/init.h>
 #include <linux/interrupt.h>
-#include <linux/delay.h>
-#include <linux/slab.h>
-#include <linux/of_device.h>
+#include <linux/io.h>
+#include <linux/iopoll.h>
+#include <linux/kernel.h>
 #include <linux/module.h>
-#include <linux/reset.h>
+#include <linux/of_device.h>
 #include <linux/pinctrl/consumer.h>
+#include <linux/platform_device.h>
 #include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
-#include <linux/iopoll.h>
-
-#include <asm/unaligned.h>
+#include <linux/reset.h>
 
 #define TEGRA_I2C_TIMEOUT (msecs_to_jiffies(1000))
 #define BYTES_PER_FIFO_WORD 4