On Sun, Nov 04, 2012 at 09:50:31AM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > On Sun, 4 Nov 2012 09:23:17 +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 10:52:46PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > > On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 09:46:33 +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > > > --- /dev/null > > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_i2c.c > > > > @@ -0,0 +1,234 @@ > > > > +/* > > > > + * ACPI I2C enumeration support > > > > + * > > > > + * Copyright (C) 2012, Intel Corporation > > > > + * Author: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > + * > > > > + * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify > > > > + * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as > > > > + * published by the Free Software Foundation. > > > > + */ > > > > + > > > > +#include <linux/acpi.h> > > > > +#include <linux/i2c.h> > > > > +#include <linux/module.h> > > > > > > You also need <linux/device.h> for dev_err() etc., and <linux/err.h> for > > > ENODEV etc. > > > > I think <acpi.h> already includes <device.h> but I'll double check. At > > least this compiles without those headers in place :) > > That's not really the point. You never know which header inclusions > will be removed from other header files in the future, so you should > include what you need explicitly. This avoids future build breakages as > well as build breakages on other architectures. Right. I've actually seen this problem few times before. I added the inclusion of <devide.h> and <err.h> to the file. Thanks. -- 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
