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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 15:01:19 -0700 (PDT) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: viresh.kumar@...com Cc: peppe.cavallaro@...com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, shiraz.hashim@...com, armando.visconti@...com, deepak.sikri@...com, viresh.linux@...il.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] linux/stmmac.h: include <linux/platform_device.h> to remove compilation warning. From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...com> Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 12:00:37 +0530 > stmmac.h uses struct platform_device and doesn't include > <linux/platform_device.h>. And so we get following compilation warning while > using this file: > warning: ‘struct platform_device’ declared inside parameter list > > This patch includes <linux/platform_device.h> in stmmac.h to remove this warning > > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...com> This patch applies to neither net-2.6, nor net-next-2.6 The context around your change in all current trees looks a lot different than what's in your patch. In fact, even if I go through the entire history in GIT of this header file, those STMAC_TYPE_0 defines are never there. The string "STMAC_TYPE_0" doesn't even show up in a query to google code search. What tree are you even patching against?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists