[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171206171515.c6phtllfdw7nfbix@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 18:15:15 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"maintainer:X86" <x86@...nel.org>,
Mike Travis <mike.travis@....com>,
Russ Anderson <russ.anderson@....com>,
"travis @ sgi . com" <travis@....com>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/platform/UV: make functions uv_handle_nmi and
uv_nmi_setup_common static
* Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com> wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
>
> Functions uv_handle_nmi and uv_nmi_setup_common are local to the
> source and do not need to be in global scope, so make them static.
>
> Cleans up sparse warnings:
> symbol 'uv_handle_nmi' was not declared. Should it be static?
> symbol 'uv_nmi_setup_common' was not declared. Should it be static?
>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/platform/uv/uv_nmi.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Please combine your three pending x86 Sparse fix patches (this one, the x86/vector
one and the x86/mm one) into a single patch. They are trivial and should not be
split into 3 patches.
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists