[PATCH] linux/stmmac.h: include <linux/platform_device.h> to remove compilation warning.

[PATCH] linux/stmmac.h: include <linux/platform_device.h> to remove compilation warning.

[Viresh Kumar]

stmmac.h uses struct platform_device and doesn't include
<linux/platform_device.h>. And so we get following compilation warning while
using this file:
	warning: ‘struct platform_device’ declared inside parameter list

This patch includes <linux/platform_device.h> in stmmac.h to remove this warning

Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@st.com>
---
 include/linux/stmmac.h |    2 ++
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/stmmac.h b/include/linux/stmmac.h
index 73d9b4e..d7dfe7d 100644
--- a/include/linux/stmmac.h
+++ b/include/linux/stmmac.h
@@ -26,6 +26,8 @@
 #ifndef __STMMAC_PLATFORM_DATA
 #define __STMMAC_PLATFORM_DATA
 
+#include <linux/platform_device.h>
+
 #define STMAC_TYPE_0	0
 #define STMAC_TYPE_1	1
 #define STMAC_TYPE_2	2
-- 
1.7.2.2

Re: [PATCH] linux/stmmac.h: include <linux/platform_device.h> to remove compilation warning.

[Giuseppe CAVALLARO]

On 5/2/2011 8:30 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> stmmac.h uses struct platform_device and doesn't include
> <linux/platform_device.h>. And so we get following compilation warning while
> using this file:
> 	warning: ‘struct platform_device’ declared inside parameter list
> 
> This patch includes <linux/platform_device.h> in stmmac.h to remove this warning

Hi Viresh

thanks for the patch that looks good for me.
We could also remove this inclusion (see commit
1f0f63885658889b3bcb8a08fbcb9532f8e536c9) from
drivers/net/stmmac/stmmac.h and keep it in linux/stmmac.h as you suggested.

What do you think?

Regards
Peppe

> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@st.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/stmmac.h |    2 ++
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/stmmac.h b/include/linux/stmmac.h
> index 73d9b4e..d7dfe7d 100644
> --- a/include/linux/stmmac.h
> +++ b/include/linux/stmmac.h
> @@ -26,6 +26,8 @@
>  #ifndef __STMMAC_PLATFORM_DATA
>  #define __STMMAC_PLATFORM_DATA
>  
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +
>  #define STMAC_TYPE_0	0
>  #define STMAC_TYPE_1	1
>  #define STMAC_TYPE_2	2

Re: [PATCH] linux/stmmac.h: include <linux/platform_device.h> to remove compilation warning.

[viresh kumar]

On 05/02/2011 06:16 PM, Giuseppe CAVALLARO wrote:
> We could also remove this inclusion (see commit
> 1f0f63885658889b3bcb8a08fbcb9532f8e536c9) from
> drivers/net/stmmac/stmmac.h and keep it in linux/stmmac.h as you suggested.

Yes, i will do that and resend.

-- 
viresh

Re: [PATCH] linux/stmmac.h: include <linux/platform_device.h> to remove compilation warning.

[David Miller]

From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@st.com>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 12:00:37 +0530

> stmmac.h uses struct platform_device and doesn't include
> <linux/platform_device.h>. And so we get following compilation warning while
> using this file:
> 	warning: ‘struct platform_device’ declared inside parameter list
> 
> This patch includes <linux/platform_device.h> in stmmac.h to remove this warning
> 
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@st.com>

This patch applies to neither net-2.6, nor net-next-2.6

The context around your change in all current trees looks a lot
different than what's in your patch.

In fact, even if I go through the entire history in GIT of this
header file, those STMAC_TYPE_0 defines are never there.

The string "STMAC_TYPE_0" doesn't even show up in a query to google
code search.

What tree are you even patching against?

Re: [PATCH] linux/stmmac.h: include <linux/platform_device.h> to remove compilation warning.

[viresh kumar]

On 05/03/2011 03:31 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@st.com>
> This patch applies to neither net-2.6, nor net-next-2.6
> 

Sorry David,

I was on a wrong tree. Will resend it.

-- 
viresh