Hi Chris, On Wednesday, July 10, 2019 5:01:04 PM CEST Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Janusz Krzysztofik (2019-07-10 15:52:39) > > Follow dim checkpatch recommendation so it doesn't complain on that now > > and again on header file modifications. > > > > Signed-off-by: Janusz Krzysztofik <janusz.krzyszto...@linux.intel.com> > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_drv.h > > @@ -2388,19 +2388,18 @@ __i915_printk(struct drm_i915_private *dev_priv, const char *level, > > __i915_printk(dev_priv, KERN_ERR, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__) > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT > > -extern long i915_compat_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd, > > - unsigned long arg); > > +long i915_compat_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg); > > #else > > #define i915_compat_ioctl NULL > > #endif > > extern const struct dev_pm_ops i915_pm_ops; > > +extern const struct dev_pm_ops i915_pm_ops_1; > > That's novel.
Oh, sorry, that was my testing of how dim checkpatch reacts on extern qualifiers on variables. Thanks for catching this. Janusz > > -Chris > _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
