[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0b0bc38c2c76917e9a29e216d6ae7d265a919d07.camel@codeconstruct.com.au>
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2023 09:22:44 +1030
From: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...econstruct.com.au>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Cc: minyard@....org, openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, aladyshev22@...il.com,
jk@...econstruct.com.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] ipmi: kcs_bmc: Make kcs_bmc_update_event_mask()
static
On Fri, 2023-11-03 at 14:40 +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 16:45:15 +1030
> Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...econstruct.com.au> wrote:
>
> > There were no users outside the subsystem core, so let's not expose it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...econstruct.com.au>
> Is it worth having the wrapper?
Perhaps not, though aesthetically I prefer it. Also the diff is at
least slightly smaller by not removing it entirely :)
>
> I guess all the other cases do have wrappers (even if that's because
> they continue to be exported) so fair enough.
>
> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Thanks,
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists