linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 27/43] drivers/net/sfc: fix sparse warnings: Should it be static?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 16 Feb 2009 10:38:26 +0100
From:	Hannes Eder <hannes@...neseder.net>
To:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 27/43] drivers/net/sfc: fix sparse warnings: Should it be 
	static?

On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 1:37 AM, Ben Hutchings
<bhutchings@...arflare.com> wrote:
> Hannes Eder wrote:
>> Impact: Include header file and include the function under the same
>> condition as in the header file.  If CONFIG_SFS_MTD is not defined
>> than the functions 'efx_mtd_remove' and 'efx_mtd_rename' are defined
>> 'static inline' with an empty function body in the header file.
>>
>> Fix this sparse warnings:
>>   drivers/net/sfc/mtd.c:204:6: warning: symbol 'efx_mtd_remove' was not declared. Should it be static?
>>   drivers/net/sfc/mtd.c:221:6: warning: symbol 'efx_mtd_rename' was not declared. Should it be static?
>>   drivers/net/sfc/mtd.c:230:5: warning: symbol 'efx_mtd_probe' was not declared. Should it be static?
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hannes Eder <hannes@...neseder.net>
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/sfc/mtd.c |    3 +++
>>  1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/sfc/mtd.c b/drivers/net/sfc/mtd.c
>> index 665cafb..94c9ed8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/sfc/mtd.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/sfc/mtd.c
>> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@
>>  #define EFX_DRIVER_NAME "sfc_mtd"
>>  #include "net_driver.h"
>>  #include "spi.h"
>> +#include "efx.h"
>>
>>  #define EFX_SPI_VERIFY_BUF_LEN 16
>>
>
> OK, but...
>
>> @@ -201,6 +202,7 @@ static void efx_mtd_sync(struct mtd_info *mtd)
>>       return;
>>  }
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SFC_MTD
>>  void efx_mtd_remove(struct efx_nic *efx)
>>  {
>>       if (efx->spi_flash && efx->spi_flash->mtd) {
>> @@ -266,3 +268,4 @@ int efx_mtd_probe(struct efx_nic *efx)
>>
>>       return 0;
>>  }
>> +#endif /* CONFIG_SFC_MTD */
>
> This is wrong.  The entire file is conditional on CONFIG_SFC_MTD.

Even better than. It's actually not wrong, just done twice, so we can
omit it, thank you Ben. I'll send an update.

Hannes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/