On 02/21/20 at 02:26pm, Alastair D'Silva wrote: > From: Alastair D'Silva <alast...@d-silva.org> > > Function declarations don't need externs, remove the existing ones > so they are consistent with newer code > > Signed-off-by: Alastair D'Silva <alast...@d-silva.org> > --- > arch/powerpc/include/asm/pnv-ocxl.h | 32 ++++++++++++++--------------- > include/misc/ocxl.h | 6 +++--- > 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pnv-ocxl.h > b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pnv-ocxl.h > index 0b2a6707e555..b23c99bc0c84 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pnv-ocxl.h > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/pnv-ocxl.h > @@ -9,29 +9,27 @@ > #define PNV_OCXL_TL_BITS_PER_RATE 4 > #define PNV_OCXL_TL_RATE_BUF_SIZE ((PNV_OCXL_TL_MAX_TEMPLATE+1) * > PNV_OCXL_TL_BITS_PER_RATE / 8) > > -extern int pnv_ocxl_get_actag(struct pci_dev *dev, u16 *base, u16 *enabled, > - u16 *supported);
It works w or w/o extern when declare functions. Searching 'extern' under include can find so many functions with 'extern' adding. Do we have a explicit standard if we should add or remove 'exter' in function declaration? I have no objection to this patch, just want to make clear so that I can handle it w/o confusion. Thanks Baoquan _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-le...@lists.01.org
