Hi Ira, Ira Weiny <ira.we...@intel.com> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 07:27:25PM +0800, Wan Jiabing wrote: >> struct device is declared at 133rd line. >> The declaration here is unnecessary. Remove it. >> >> Signed-off-by: Wan Jiabing <wanjiab...@vivo.com> >> --- >> include/linux/libnvdimm.h | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/libnvdimm.h b/include/linux/libnvdimm.h >> index 01f251b6e36c..89b69e645ac7 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/libnvdimm.h >> +++ b/include/linux/libnvdimm.h >> @@ -141,7 +141,6 @@ static inline void __iomem *devm_nvdimm_ioremap(struct >> device *dev, >> >> struct nvdimm_bus; >> struct module; >> -struct device; >> struct nd_blk_region; > > What is the coding style preference for pre-declarations like this? Should > they be placed at the top of the file? > > The patch is reasonable but if the intent is to declare right before use for > clarity, both devm_nvdimm_memremap() and nd_blk_region_desc() use struct > device. So perhaps this duplicate is on purpose? There are other struct device usage much later in the file, which doesn't have any pre-declarations for struct device. So I assume this might not be on purpose :-) On a side note, types.h can also be removed, since it's already included in kernel.h. Santosh > > Ira > >> struct nd_blk_region_desc { >> int (*enable)(struct nvdimm_bus *nvdimm_bus, struct device *dev); >> -- >> 2.25.1 >> > _______________________________________________ > Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvd...@lists.01.org > To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-le...@lists.01.org