linux-kernel - [PATCH v2] staging: lustre: service.c: make local functions 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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1438547791-26233-1-git-send-email-zoltan.lajos.kis@gmail.com>
Date:	Sun,  2 Aug 2015 22:36:31 +0200
From:	Zoltán Lajos Kis <zoltan.lajos.kis@...il.com>
To:	oleg.drokin@...el.com, andreas.dilger@...el.com,
	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, Julia.Lawall@...6.fr,
	bgolaszewski@...libre.com, john.hammond@...el.com,
	dmitry4ever@...il.com
Cc:	HPDD-discuss@...ts.01.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] staging: lustre: service.c: make local functions static

Makes functions that are not used outside the file in which they are defined
static, as reported by sparse:

drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/service.c:72:35: warning: symbol
'ptlrpc_alloc_rqbd' was not declared. Should it be static?
1065 drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/service.c:105:1: warning:
symbol 'ptlrpc_free_rqbd' was not declared. Should it be static?
1066 drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/service.c:122:1: warning:
symbol 'ptlrpc_grow_req_bufs' was not declared. Should it be static?
1067 drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/service.c:3055:5: warning:
symbol 'ptlrpc_svcpt_health_check' was not declared. Should it be
static?

Signed-off-by: Zoltán Lajos Kis <zoltan.lajos.kis@...il.com>"
---
v2: Made commit message and subject line more descriptive

 drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/service.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/service.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/service.c
index cf9477d..d3265a8 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/service.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ptlrpc/service.c
@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ LIST_HEAD(ptlrpc_all_services);
 /** Used to protect the \e ptlrpc_all_services list */
 struct mutex ptlrpc_all_services_mutex;
 
-struct ptlrpc_request_buffer_desc *
+static struct ptlrpc_request_buffer_desc *
 ptlrpc_alloc_rqbd(struct ptlrpc_service_part *svcpt)
 {
 	struct ptlrpc_service *svc = svcpt->scp_service;
@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ ptlrpc_alloc_rqbd(struct ptlrpc_service_part *svcpt)
 	return rqbd;
 }
 
-void
+static void
 ptlrpc_free_rqbd(struct ptlrpc_request_buffer_desc *rqbd)
 {
 	struct ptlrpc_service_part *svcpt = rqbd->rqbd_svcpt;
@@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ ptlrpc_free_rqbd(struct ptlrpc_request_buffer_desc *rqbd)
 	kfree(rqbd);
 }
 
-int
+static int
 ptlrpc_grow_req_bufs(struct ptlrpc_service_part *svcpt, int post)
 {
 	struct ptlrpc_service *svc = svcpt->scp_service;
@@ -3052,7 +3052,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(ptlrpc_unregister_service);
  * Right now, it just checks to make sure that requests aren't languishing
  * in the queue.  We'll use this health check to govern whether a node needs
  * to be shot, so it's intentionally non-aggressive. */
-int ptlrpc_svcpt_health_check(struct ptlrpc_service_part *svcpt)
+static int ptlrpc_svcpt_health_check(struct ptlrpc_service_part *svcpt)
 {
 	struct ptlrpc_request *request = NULL;
 	struct timeval right_now;
-- 
1.9.1

--
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/