linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] i2c / ACPI: add ACPI enumeration support

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:	Sun, 4 Nov 2012 12:50:07 +0200
From:	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lenb@...nel.org,
	rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com, broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com,
	grant.likely@...retlab.ca, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
	ben-linux@...ff.org, w.sang@...gutronix.de,
	mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] i2c / ACPI: add ACPI enumeration support

On Sun, Nov 04, 2012 at 09:50:31AM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 09:23:17 +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 10:52:46PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > > On Sat,  3 Nov 2012 09:46:33 +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_i2c.c
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,234 @@
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * ACPI I2C enumeration support
> > > > + *
> > > > + * Copyright (C) 2012, Intel Corporation
> > > > + * Author: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
> > > > + *
> > > > + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
> > > > + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
> > > > + * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> > > > + */
> > > > +
> > > > +#include <linux/acpi.h>
> > > > +#include <linux/i2c.h>
> > > > +#include <linux/module.h>
> > > 
> > > You also need <linux/device.h> for dev_err() etc., and <linux/err.h> for
> > > ENODEV etc.
> > 
> > I think <acpi.h> already includes <device.h> but I'll double check. At
> > least this compiles without those headers in place :)
> 
> That's not really the point. You never know which header inclusions
> will be removed from other header files in the future, so you should
> include what you need explicitly. This avoids future build breakages as
> well as build breakages on other architectures.

Right. I've actually seen this problem few times before. I added the
inclusion of <devide.h> and <err.h> to the file.

Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/