linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next] pinctrl: artpec6: Make two 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20190408180110.GA15199@archlinux-ryzen>
Date:   Mon, 8 Apr 2019 11:01:10 -0700
From:   Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>
To:     Yue Haibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>
Cc:     jesper.nilsson@...s.com, lars.persson@...s.com,
        linus.walleij@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...s.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] pinctrl: artpec6: Make two functions static

On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 11:09:09PM +0800, Yue Haibing wrote:
> From: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>
> 
> Fix sparse warnings:
> 
> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-artpec6.c:691:5: warning:
>  symbol 'artpec6_pmx_enable' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-artpec6.c:705:6: warning:
>  symbol 'artpec6_pmx_disable' was not declared. Should it be static?
> 
> Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>
> ---
>  drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-artpec6.c | 10 ++++++----
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-artpec6.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-artpec6.c
> index d89dc43..e836850 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-artpec6.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-artpec6.c
> @@ -688,8 +688,9 @@ static void artpec6_pmx_select_func(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
>  	}
>  }
>  
> -int artpec6_pmx_enable(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, unsigned int function,
> -		       unsigned int group)
> +static int artpec6_pmx_enable(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
> +			      unsigned int function,
> +			      unsigned int group)
>  {
>  	struct artpec6_pmx *pmx = pinctrl_dev_get_drvdata(pctldev);
>  
> @@ -702,8 +703,9 @@ int artpec6_pmx_enable(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, unsigned int function,
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -void artpec6_pmx_disable(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, unsigned int function,
> -			 unsigned int group)
> +static void artpec6_pmx_disable(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
> +				unsigned int function,
> +				unsigned int group)

On arm32 allyesconfig:

drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-artpec6.c:706:13: error: unused function
'artpec6_pmx_disable' [-Werror,-Wunused-function]

This is the second time you've introduced an unused function warning by
making a function static[1], could you please be a little more vigilant
in your clean ups in the future?

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190327050126.12064-1-natechancellor@gmail.com/

Linus/Jesper/Lars, should this function just be deleted? I'd be happy to
send a patch doing so if that's the right course of action.

Thanks,
Nathan

>  {
>  	struct artpec6_pmx *pmx = pinctrl_dev_get_drvdata(pctldev);
>  
> -- 
> 2.7.0
> 
>