netdev - Re: [PATCH 6/8] net: gianfar: fix old-style declaration

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]

Message-ID: <0d9320db-ae2c-03a2-eb20-e527a69c356b@cogentembedded.com>
Date:	Thu, 16 Jun 2016 21:02:01 +0300
From:	Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Yangbo Lu <yangbo.lu@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] net: gianfar: fix old-style declaration

Hello.

On 06/16/2016 04:52 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:

> Modern C standards expect the '__inline__' keyword to come before the return
> type in a declaration, and we get a warning for this with "make W=1":
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c:2278:1: error: 'inline' is not at beginning of declaration [-Werror=old-style-declaration]
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c
> index 2e6785b6e8be..d20935dc8399 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar.c
> @@ -2275,7 +2275,7 @@ static inline void gfar_tx_checksum(struct sk_buff *skb, struct txfcb *fcb,
>  	fcb->flags = flags;
>  }
>
> -void inline gfar_tx_vlan(struct sk_buff *skb, struct txfcb *fcb)
> +static inline void gfar_tx_vlan(struct sk_buff *skb, struct txfcb *fcb)

    You don't mention making it *static*. Though the function can be *static* 
indeed... the current policy also forbids *inline* in the *.c files, leaving 
the judgement to gcc.

MBR, Sergei