linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] mfd: cs42l43: Tidy up header includes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 20:54:57 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
Cc: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com>, broonie@...nel.org, 
	patches@...nsource.cirrus.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-spi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] mfd: cs42l43: Tidy up header includes

On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 3:55 PM Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2024, Charles Keepax wrote:
>
> > Use more forward declarations, move header guards to cover other
> > includes, and rely less on including headers through other headers.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
>
> Patches look okay to me, but seeing as Andy suggested the changes, it
> would be good to get a R-by from him.

I'm worried now only about missing a commit message in one patch and
(with less severity) the v2 of this one which appears not to be
necessary (i.e. v1 is fully okay). If you consider the commit message
absence is okay, feel free to apply v2, otherwise with that addressed
v3 can go in my opinion.

Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>



-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko