> ... > > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/file_storage.c b/drivers/usb/gadget/file_storage.c > > index 88fedd0..c44092b 100644 > > --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/file_storage.c > > +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/file_storage.c > > @@ -248,6 +248,7 @@ > > #include <linux/freezer.h> > > #include <linux/utsname.h> > > > > +#include <linux/usb.h> > > #include <linux/usb/ch9.h> > > #include <linux/usb/gadget.h> > > While there's nothing wrong with this part of the patch, it hardly > seems necessary. Was there any reason for including it? The new functions are defined in usb.h. I have added the include in this file and in the file epautoconf.c that this file includes. If it is removed from both, then the code does not compile (after make allyesconfig): In file included from drivers/usb/gadget/file_storage.c:268: drivers/usb/gadget/epautoconf.c: In function 'ep_matches': drivers/usb/gadget/epautoconf.c:79: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_endpoint_type' drivers/usb/gadget/epautoconf.c:122: error: implicit declaration of function 'usb_endpoint_dir_in' make[1]: *** [drivers/usb/gadget/file_storage.o] Error 1 make: *** [drivers/usb/gadget/file_storage.o] Error 2 While putting it in epautoconf.c would be sufficient, the includes #include <linux/usb/ch9.h> #include <linux/usb/gadget.h> are already repeated in both, so it would seem reasonable to repeat usb.h in both as well. julia -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
