Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752676AbaBJSgy (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Feb 2014 13:36:54 -0500 Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com ([209.85.220.41]:39933 "EHLO mail-pa0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752526AbaBJSgs (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Feb 2014 13:36:48 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1391859219-3102-1-git-send-email-lpapp@kde.org> <20140210122129.GA23053@lee--X1> Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 18:36:47 +0000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: cHUq7dfx5V2x2GcW8jeDDHw22OM Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mfd: MAX6650/6651 support From: Laszlo Papp To: Sachin Kamat Cc: Lee Jones , Linus Walleij , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Sachin Kamat wrote: > On 10 February 2014 17:51, Lee Jones wrote: >>> > +#include >>> > +#include >>> > +#include >>> > +#include >>> >>> Please arrange these alphabetically. >> >> Why? > > 1. It makes it easier to avoid adding duplicate includes. > 2. Code looks more ordered/organized. > 3. Prevents further clean up patches arranging them so :) 1) I am sorry, but I need to disagree with this one, personally. Check duplicates could be done by a util at any given moment if it becomes a pressing issue. 2) Not for me. I prefer hierarchical dependency based inclusion between headers if there is such a thing, or just orthogonal if not. 3) It does not apply to my taste due to 1-2). I would also like to add further detriments: 4) file rename could rearrange the list with your suggestion. 5) It would be inconsistent with a large code base out there. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/