On Fri, 2017-02-10 at 16:01 +1030, Joel Stanley wrote: > > + > > +#ifndef __OCC_P9_H__ > > +#define __OCC_P9_H__ > > + > > +#include "scom.h" > > + > > +struct device; > > Include the header for struct device instead. > > Did you consider the one header file for all of your shared functions? > I don't think there's much value in having a whole heap of small ones. My bias is against monolithic headers. While it would be no linux/sched.h[1] so the impact won't be great, I prefer keeping headers to only describing the abstract data type at hand. A collection of small, relevant headers makes it easier for me to understand the abstraction boundaries. Andrew [1] https://lwn.net/Articles/713712/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
