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
