Re: [patch 1/3] m68k/mac: Make mac_hid_mouse_emulate_buttons() declaration visible

[Dmitry Torokhov]

On 7/20/07, Adrian Bunk <bunk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 01:47:36PM -0400, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Hi Geert,
> >
> > On 7/20/07, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> 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 <linux/hid.h>, correct the type of the second parameter, and
> >> include <linux/hid.h> 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.

I am OK with adding a new header file. I was just saying that placing
that declaration in linux/hid.h makes about the same sense as putting
it into linux/scsi.h

--
Dmitry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/