On 05/06/2016 01:31 PM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > Hi Marek, Hi!
> 2016-05-06 19:50 GMT+09:00 Marek Vasut <[email protected]>: >> On 05/06/2016 12:36 PM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: >>> This should be declared for xhci_ctrl_tx() to avoid build error. >> >> Can you please include the build error in the commit message ? >> That is extremely useful. >> >>> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> >>> drivers/usb/host/xhci.h | 2 ++ >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/xhci.h b/drivers/usb/host/xhci.h >>> index 2afa386..16dd61a 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/usb/host/xhci.h >>> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/xhci.h >>> @@ -1252,6 +1252,8 @@ void xhci_acknowledge_event(struct xhci_ctrl *ctrl); >>> union xhci_trb *xhci_wait_for_event(struct xhci_ctrl *ctrl, trb_type >>> expected); >>> int xhci_bulk_tx(struct usb_device *udev, unsigned long pipe, >>> int length, void *buffer); >>> + >>> +struct devrequest; >> >> I don't think that's the right thing to do, since the structure >> devrequest is not defined anywhere in this file or the headers >> which are included in this file. >> >> Will this patch work for you instead? It includes usb.h , which >> defines the struct devrequest. > > Of course, works. > But why? Because you want to have definition of every symbol you use in your headers when you include that header. I am not a big fan of huge stack of #include statements in a driver. > xhci_ctrl_tx() only takes a pointer to struct devrequest. > > This header does not need to know > the members of struct devrequest, or sizeof(struct devrequest). > > We need to teach it that devrequest is a structure. > That's enough. > > > This is a very common way to fix > "warning: 'struct devrequest' declared inside parameter list" error. > > For example, > > head -25 include/linux/clk.h > head -30 include/linux/pinctrl/pinctrl.h > > in Linux Kernel. Ha, I didn't know about that. Is that some new recommended practice or is this a matter of taste ? CCing Tom and Simon, so I can get some more input on this. I cannot decide either way myself. >> --->8--- >> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/xhci.h b/drivers/usb/host/xhci.h >> index 2afa386..b5a2ea5 100644 >> --- a/drivers/usb/host/xhci.h >> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/xhci.h >> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@ >> #include <asm/io.h> >> #include <linux/list.h> >> #include <linux/compat.h> >> +#include <usb.h> >> >> #define MAX_EP_CTX_NUM 31 >> #define XHCI_ALIGNMENT 64 >> ---8<--- >> >>> int xhci_ctrl_tx(struct usb_device *udev, unsigned long pipe, >>> struct devrequest *req, int length, void *buffer); >>> int xhci_check_maxpacket(struct usb_device *udev); >>> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Marek Vasut >> _______________________________________________ >> U-Boot mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot > > > -- Best regards, Marek Vasut _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
