Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 27 Sep 2022 17:10:53 +0200 | From | Uwe Kleine-König <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 4/8] pwm: lpss: Include headers we are direct user of |
| |
Hello,
On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 05:47:19PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > For the sake of integrity, include headers we are direct user of. > > While at it, add missed struct pwm_lpss_boardinfo one and replace > device.h with a forward declaration. The latter improves compile > time due to reducing overhead of device.h parsing with entire train > of dependencies.
Hm, I copied the cmdline for the compiler from a V=1 build and only run the compiler on drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss-pci.c.
With #include <device.h> I got:
real 0m0.421s user 0m0.354s sys 0m0.066s
With struct device; I got:
real 0m0.431s user 0m0.378s sys 0m0.052s
Are the numbers for you considerably different?
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> > Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> > --- > drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.h | 6 +++++- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.h b/drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.h > index c344921b2cab..839622964b2a 100644 > --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.h > +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-lpss.h > @@ -10,11 +10,15 @@ > #ifndef __PWM_LPSS_H > #define __PWM_LPSS_H > > -#include <linux/device.h> > #include <linux/pwm.h> > +#include <linux/types.h> > > #define MAX_PWMS 4 > > +struct device; > + > +struct pwm_lpss_boardinfo;
Hmm, I wonder why there is no compiler warning without that declaration. At least in my builds. Do you see a warning? IMHO it's better to fix that be swapping the order of struct pwm_lpss_chip and struct pwm_lpss_boardinfo.
> struct pwm_lpss_chip { > struct pwm_chip chip; > void __iomem *regs;
Best regards Uwe
-- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ | [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |