On 20/2/24 03:33, Zhao Liu wrote:
Hi Philippe,
On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 03:14:09PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 15:14:09 +0100
From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@linaro.org>
Subject: [PATCH 3/5] hw/acpi/ich9: Include missing headers
X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.41.0
The ICH9LPCPMRegs structure has MemoryRegion and
Notifier fields, so requires the "qemu/notify.h"
and "exec/memory.h" headers.
However nothing from "hw/acpi/acpi_dev_interface.h"
is required, so reduce its inclusion to hw/acpi/ich9.c
source file where it is used.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@linaro.org>
---
include/hw/acpi/ich9.h | 3 ++-
hw/acpi/ich9.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/acpi/ich9.c b/hw/acpi/ich9.c
index 573d032e8e..be375a8b9d 100644
--- a/hw/acpi/ich9.c
+++ b/hw/acpi/ich9.c
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@
#include "sysemu/runstate.h"
#include "hw/acpi/acpi.h"
#include "hw/acpi/ich9_tco.h"
-
+#include "hw/acpi/acpi_dev_interface.h"
Do we have the requirement for included header ordering?
We don't. If headers were properly including requisites and
self-contained, order shouldn't matter, and we could sort them
alphabetically to enforce a common style.
If so, it would be better to put it before "hw/acpi/ich9_tco.h".
Sure, no problem.
-Zhao
#include "hw/southbridge/ich9.h"
#include "hw/mem/pc-dimm.h"
#include "hw/mem/nvdimm.h"
--
2.41.0
