linux-kernel - Applied "spi: loopback-test: make several module parameters static" to the spi tree

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <E1dXSsA-0008I0-2f@debutante>
Date:   Tue, 18 Jul 2017 14:49:10 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Applied "spi: loopback-test: make several module parameters static" to the spi tree

The patch

   spi: loopback-test: make several module parameters static

has been applied to the spi tree at

   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git 

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.  

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark

>From 59a8831da31ebdabf82cac82bf01270d215bf149 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2017 13:42:32 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] spi: loopback-test: make several module parameters static

Several module parameters are local to the source, so make them
static. Cleans up several sparse warnings such as:

"symbol 'loop_req' was not declared. Should it be static?"

Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
---
 drivers/spi/spi-loopback-test.c | 14 +++++++-------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-loopback-test.c b/drivers/spi/spi-loopback-test.c
index 0d3c56e2526c..64a1e6f212c1 100644
--- a/drivers/spi/spi-loopback-test.c
+++ b/drivers/spi/spi-loopback-test.c
@@ -32,45 +32,45 @@
 #include "spi-test.h"
 
 /* flag to only simulate transfers */
-int simulate_only;
+static int simulate_only;
 module_param(simulate_only, int, 0);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(simulate_only, "if not 0 do not execute the spi message");
 
 /* dump spi messages */
-int dump_messages;
+static int dump_messages;
 module_param(dump_messages, int, 0);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(dump_messages,
 		 "=1 dump the basic spi_message_structure, " \
 		 "=2 dump the spi_message_structure including data, " \
 		 "=3 dump the spi_message structure before and after execution");
 /* the device is jumpered for loopback - enabling some rx_buf tests */
-int loopback;
+static int loopback;
 module_param(loopback, int, 0);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(loopback,
 		 "if set enable loopback mode, where the rx_buf "	\
 		 "is checked to match tx_buf after the spi_message "	\
 		 "is executed");
 
-int loop_req;
+static int loop_req;
 module_param(loop_req, int, 0);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(loop_req,
 		 "if set controller will be asked to enable test loop mode. " \
 		 "If controller supported it, MISO and MOSI will be connected");
 
 /* run only a specific test */
-int run_only_test = -1;
+static int run_only_test = -1;
 module_param(run_only_test, int, 0);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(run_only_test,
 		 "only run the test with this number (0-based !)");
 
 /* use vmalloc'ed buffers */
-int use_vmalloc;
+static int use_vmalloc;
 module_param(use_vmalloc, int, 0644);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(use_vmalloc,
 		 "use vmalloc'ed buffers instead of kmalloc'ed");
 
 /* check rx ranges */
-int check_ranges = 1;
+static int check_ranges = 1;
 module_param(check_ranges, int, 0644);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(check_ranges,
 		 "checks rx_buffer pattern are valid");
-- 
2.13.2