[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YRJTgMI5CaG7VdGx@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2021 12:22:56 +0200
From: gregkh <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk>,
Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>,
linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: remove rtw_ioctl function
On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 10:08:31AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 9:45 AM Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk> wrote:
> > -int rtw_ioctl(struct net_device *dev, struct ifreq *rq, int cmd)
> > -{
> > - struct iwreq *wrq = (struct iwreq *)rq;
> > - int ret = 0;
> > -
> > - switch (cmd) {
> > - case RTL_IOCTL_WPA_SUPPLICANT:
> > - ret = wpa_supplicant_ioctl(dev, &wrq->u.data);
> > - break;
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_88EU_AP_MODE
> > - case RTL_IOCTL_HOSTAPD:
> > - ret = rtw_hostapd_ioctl(dev, &wrq->u.data);
> > - break;
> > -#endif /* CONFIG_88EU_AP_MODE */
> > - case SIOCDEVPRIVATE:
> > - ret = rtw_ioctl_wext_private(dev, &wrq->u);
> > - break;
>
>
> I think these functions are all defined 'static' in the same file, so
> removing the
> caller will cause a warning about an unused function. Better remove the
> called functions along with the caller.
I get no build warnings/errors with this patch applied, which is odd.
So I'll take this for now, but a follow-on patch to remove these unused
functions would be great to have.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists