linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/11] staging: rtl8723bs: remove argument in recv_indicatepkts_pkt_loss

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]

Date:   Mon, 22 Mar 2021 19:19:07 +0100
From:   Fabio Aiuto <fabioaiuto83@...il.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     joe@...ches.com, apw@...onical.com, devel@...verdev.osuosl.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] staging: rtl8723bs: remove argument in
 recv_indicatepkts_pkt_loss_cnt

On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 05:11:13PM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 03:31:43PM +0100, Fabio Aiuto wrote:
> > remove debug_priv argument so function prototype can be
> > easily moved away
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Fabio Aiuto <fabioaiuto83@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_recv.c | 11 ++++++-----
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_recv.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_recv.c
> > index 9ef2408ded57..e2a6afed723c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_recv.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_recv.c
> > @@ -1983,13 +1983,13 @@ int enqueue_reorder_recvframe(struct recv_reorder_ctrl *preorder_ctrl, union rec
> >  
> >  }
> >  
> > -void recv_indicatepkts_pkt_loss_cnt(struct debug_priv *pdbgpriv, u64 prev_seq, u64 current_seq);
> > -void recv_indicatepkts_pkt_loss_cnt(struct debug_priv *pdbgpriv, u64 prev_seq, u64 current_seq)
> > +u64 recv_indicatepkts_pkt_loss_cnt(u64 prev_seq, u64 current_seq);
> 
> But you did not drop the function prototype, why keep it?
> 
> And shouldn't this be static?
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

I moved it in a header file in the next patch [6/11]. However is better a
static function when possible and drop the prototype.