>On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 07:27:25PM +0800, Wan Jiabing wrote:>> struct device >is declared at 133rd line. >> The declaration here is unnecessary. Remove it. >> >> Signed-off-by: Wan Jiabing <wanjiab...@vivo.com> >> --- >> include/linux/libnvdimm.h | 1 - >> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/libnvdimm.h b/include/linux/libnvdimm.h >> index 01f251b6e36c..89b69e645ac7 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/libnvdimm.h >> +++ b/include/linux/libnvdimm.h >> @@ -141,7 +141,6 @@ static inline void __iomem *devm_nvdimm_ioremap(struct >> device *dev, >> >> struct nvdimm_bus; >> struct module; >> -struct device; >> struct nd_blk_region; > >What is the coding style preference for pre-declarations like this? Should >they be placed at the top of the file? > >The patch is reasonable but if the intent is to declare right before use for >clarity, both devm_nvdimm_memremap() and nd_blk_region_desc() use struct >device. So perhaps this duplicate is on purpose? > >Ira
OK, my script just catch this duplicate. And I will report the duplicate if there is no MACRO dependence. But I hadn't thought of whether the duplicate is a prompt on purpose. Sorry. Thanks for your reply. Wan Jiabing >> struct nd_blk_region_desc { >> int (*enable)(struct nvdimm_bus *nvdimm_bus, struct device *dev); >> -- >> 2.25.1 >> _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-le...@lists.01.org