[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52170.1575603873@turing-police>
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2019 22:44:33 -0500
From: "Valdis Klētnieks" <valdis.kletnieks@...edu>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] x86/microcode: make stub function static inline
When building with C=1 W=1, both sparse and gcc complain:
CHECK arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c
./arch/x86/include/asm/microcode_amd.h:56:6: warning: symbol 'reload_ucode_amd' was not declared. Should it be static?
CC arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.o
In file included from arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/core.c:36:
./arch/x86/include/asm/microcode_amd.h:56:6: warning: no previous prototype for 'reload_ucode_amd' [-Wmissing-prototypes
]
56 | void reload_ucode_amd(void) {}
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And they're right - that function can be a static inline like its brethren.
Signed-off-by: Valdis Kletnieks <valdis.kletnieks@...edu>
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode_amd.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode_amd.h
index 209492849566..6685e1218959 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode_amd.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/microcode_amd.h
@@ -53,6 +53,6 @@ static inline void __init load_ucode_amd_bsp(unsigned int family) {}
static inline void load_ucode_amd_ap(unsigned int family) {}
static inline int __init
save_microcode_in_initrd_amd(unsigned int family) { return -EINVAL; }
-void reload_ucode_amd(void) {}
+static inline void reload_ucode_amd(void) {}
#endif
#endif /* _ASM_X86_MICROCODE_AMD_H */
Powered by blists - more mailing lists