Christophe Leroy's on June 19, 2019 11:18 pm: > > > Le 19/06/2019 à 05:43, Nicholas Piggin a écrit : >> Christophe Leroy's on June 11, 2019 3:24 pm: >>> >>> >>> Le 10/06/2019 à 06:38, Nicholas Piggin a écrit : > > [snip] > >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/vmalloc.h b/include/linux/vmalloc.h >>>> index 51e131245379..812bea5866d6 100644 >>>> --- a/include/linux/vmalloc.h >>>> +++ b/include/linux/vmalloc.h >>>> @@ -147,6 +147,9 @@ extern struct vm_struct *find_vm_area(const void *addr); >>>> extern int map_vm_area(struct vm_struct *area, pgprot_t prot, >>>> struct page **pages); >>>> #ifdef CONFIG_MMU >>>> +extern int vmap_range(unsigned long addr, >>>> + unsigned long end, phys_addr_t phys_addr, pgprot_t prot, >>>> + unsigned int max_page_shift); >>> >>> Drop extern keyword here. >> >> I don't know if I was going crazy but at one point I was getting >> duplicate symbol errors that were fixed by adding extern somewhere. > > probably not on a function name ... I know it sounds crazy :P >>> As checkpatch tells you, 'CHECK:AVOID_EXTERNS: extern prototypes should >>> be avoided in .h files' >> >> I prefer to follow existing style in surrounding code at the expense >> of some checkpatch warnings. If somebody later wants to "fix" it >> that's fine. > > I don't think that's fine to 'fix' later things that could be done right > from the begining. 'Cosmetic only' fixes never happen because they are a > nightmare for backports, and a shame for 'git blame'. > > In some patches, you add cleanups to make the code look nicer, and here > you have the opportunity to make the code nice from the begining and you > prefer repeating the errors done in the past ? You're surprising me. Well I never claimed to be consistent. I actually don't mind the extern keyword so it's probably just my personal preference that makes me notice something nearby. I have dropped those "cleanup" changes though, so there. Thanks, Nick
