Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:5 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:5;
Message-ID: <d1ab4c5b175099fc204909e5430c87fb55565e56.camel@codeconstruct.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] ipmi: kcs_bmc: Include spinlock.h
From:   Andrew Jeffery <andrew@codeconstruct.com.au>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
Cc:     minyard@acm.org, openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aladyshev22@gmail.com,
        jk@codeconstruct.com.au
Date:   Mon, 06 Nov 2023 09:17:26 +1030
In-Reply-To: <20231103143657.0000046f@Huawei.com>
References: <20231103061522.1268637-1-andrew@codeconstruct.com.au>
         <20231103061522.1268637-3-andrew@codeconstruct.com.au>
         <20231103143657.0000046f@Huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.46.4-2 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 2023-11-03 at 14:36 +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Fri,  3 Nov 2023 16:45:14 +1030
> Andrew Jeffery <andrew@codeconstruct.com.au> wrote:
>=20
> > struct kcs_bmc_device defines a spinlock member but the header in which
> > it is defined failed to include the spinlock header. In the spirit of
> > include-what-you-use, do what's necessary.
> >=20
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@codeconstruct.com.au>
> This is fine, but whilst checking it I noticed there is no
> forwards def of struct device or appropriate include.

Ah, I'll fix that too.

clangd automatically added the spinlock include at one point and so I
figured I'd capture it.

Andrew