On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 07:29:27 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 07:20:29AM -0400, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Would it be possible to simply place these functions at the right > > location so that forward declarations are not needed? Ideally I would > > like to get rid of all these forward declarations. > > > I moved lm90_select_remote_channel() so the lm90_read_reg() declaration > is no longer needed. > > Code structure is such that sensor show/set functions come first, followed by > "real" code. Unfortunately, that implies that local functions called from > those functions have to be forward declarated. > > We can move that around to avoid forward declarations, but I would prefer > to do that in a separate patch if we decide to go that way. Sure, fine with me. > [...] > > > +/* > > > + * Additional attributes for devices with 3 temperature sensors > > > + */ > > > +static SENSOR_DEVICE_ATTR_2(temp3_input, S_IRUGO, show_temp11, NULL, 0, 5); > > > +static SENSOR_DEVICE_ATTR_2(temp3_min, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, show_temp11, > > > + set_temp11, 3, 6); > > > +static SENSOR_DEVICE_ATTR_2(temp3_max, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, show_temp11, > > > + set_temp11, 4, 7); > > > +static SENSOR_DEVICE_ATTR(temp3_crit, S_IWUSR | S_IRUGO, show_temp8, > > > + set_temp8, 6); > > > +static SENSOR_DEVICE_ATTR(temp3_crit_hyst, S_IRUGO, show_temphyst, NULL, 4); > > > > 4, really? Remote 2 critical limit is 6. > > > I am impressed. Good catch. Now you understand why it takes me so long to review patches. I actually read them ;) -- Jean Delvare _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
