From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932601AbXGTSfx (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:35:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758386AbXGTSfm (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:35:42 -0400 Received: from mailout.stusta.mhn.de ([141.84.69.5]:39700 "EHLO mailhub.stusta.mhn.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752486AbXGTSfk (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:35:40 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 20:35:03 +0200 From: Adrian Bunk To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , Andrew Morton , linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [patch 1/3] m68k/mac: Make mac_hid_mouse_emulate_buttons() declaration visible Message-ID: <20070720183503.GC3801@stusta.de> References: <20070720164043.523003359@mail.of.borg> <20070720164323.625963918@mail.of.borg> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 01:47:36PM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > Hi Geert, > > On 7/20/07, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> From: Geert Uytterhoeven >> >> m68k/mac: Make mac_hid_mouse_emulate_buttons() declaration visible >> >> drivers/char/keyboard.c: In function 'kbd_keycode': >> drivers/char/keyboard.c:1142: error: implicit declaration of function >> 'mac_hid_mouse_emulate_buttons' >> >> The forward declaration of mac_hid_mouse_emulate_buttons() is not visible >> on >> m68k because it's hidden in the middle of a big #ifdef block. >> >> Move it to , correct the type of the second parameter, and >> include where needed. > > linux/hid.h contains definitions needed for drivers speaking HID > protocol, I don't think we want to put quirks for legacy keyboard > driver there. I'd just move the #ifdef within drivers/char/keyboard.c > for now. >... If you only move it you will keep the bug of the wrong second parameter. But if you move it to any header file gcc is able to figure out such errors itself instead of them being nasty runtime errors. Such prototypes in C files are really bad since (like in this case) they prevent the finding of bugs. It doesn't matter which header file you put the prototype into (it can even be a new one), but it belongs into a header file. > Dmitry cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed