linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drm/arm: mark symbols static where possible

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]

Message-ID: <6967038.koRMV7E4Wg@wuerfel>
Date:   Mon, 24 Oct 2016 12:18:37 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Baoyou Xie <baoyou.xie@...aro.org>
Cc:     liviu.dudau@....com, brian.starkey@....com, malidp@...s.arm.com,
        airlied@...ux.ie, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xie.baoyou@....com.cn,
        han.fei@....com.cn, tang.qiang007@....com.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/arm: mark symbols static where possible

On Saturday, October 22, 2016 5:13:01 PM CEST Baoyou Xie wrote:
> We get 2 warnings when building kernel with W=1:
> drivers/gpu/drm/arm/malidp_planes.c:49:25: warning: no previous prototype for 'malidp_duplicate_plane_state' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
> drivers/gpu/drm/arm/malidp_planes.c:66:6: warning: no previous prototype for 'malidp_destroy_plane_state' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
> 
> In fact, both functions are only used in the file in which they are
> declared and don't need a declaration, but can be made static.
> So this patch marks these functions with 'static'.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Baoyou Xie <baoyou.xie@...aro.org>
> ---
...
> @@ -63,7 +64,7 @@ struct drm_plane_state *malidp_duplicate_plane_state(struct drm_plane *plane)
>  	return &state->base;
>  }
>  
> -void malidp_destroy_plane_state(struct drm_plane *plane,
> +static void malidp_destroy_plane_state(struct drm_plane *plane,
>  				struct drm_plane_state *state)
>  {
>  	struct malidp_plane_state *m_state = to_malidp_plane_state(state);
> 

The change looks correct, but I notice that the two lines of the
declaration are no longer aligned.

The file follows the normal style of aligning the argument list
in the second line to line up with the opening '(', so please keep
it that way.

	Arnd