On Tuesday, September 11, 2012, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On 09/07/2012 11:19 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > On Friday, September 07, 2012, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > >> This variable is only used in the in processor_driver.c. > >> This patch reduces the scope of the variable by moving it > >> to this file. > > > > Well, the changelog is wrong (because the scope of the variable is > > not reduced by moving it out of the header) and I don't see the point. > > Yes, you are right. > > > Is there any _real_ problem with that definition in processor.h? > > It is not a real problem. There is no issue fixed by this patch. > It is just reorganizing the code little by little. The intent is to > group what is related to cpuidle to the C files here processor_driver.c. However, it is not recommended to put "extern something" type of declarations into *.c files. All of them should go into headers (although not necessarily in include/linux for that matter). Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
