From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Torokhov Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/15] Input: synaptics-rmi4 - fix checkpatch.pl, sparse and GCC warnings Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 11:10:29 -0800 Message-ID: <2278620.abrl2TfnmQ@dtor-d630.eng.vmware.com> References: <1390521623-6491-1-git-send-email-courtney.cavin@sonymobile.com> <20140213063611.GB15260@core.coreip.homeip.net> <52FD1559.2040101@synaptics.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: Received: from mail-pd0-f182.google.com ([209.85.192.182]:39744 "EHLO mail-pd0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751065AbaBMTKd (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:10:33 -0500 Received: by mail-pd0-f182.google.com with SMTP id v10so10837844pde.41 for ; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 11:10:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52FD1559.2040101@synaptics.com> Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Christopher Heiny Cc: Courtney Cavin , linux-input@vger.kernel.org On Thursday, February 13, 2014 10:56:25 AM Christopher Heiny wrote: > On 02/12/2014 10:36 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 05, 2014 at 05:36:09PM -0800, Christopher Heiny wrote: > >> >On 02/05/2014 05:09 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > >>> > >On Tue, Feb 04, 2014 at 03:08:12PM -0800, Christopher Heiny wrote: > >>>>> > >>>On 01/23/2014 04:00 PM, Courtney Cavin wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>> >Cc: Christopher Heiny > >>>>>>> > >>>> >Cc: Dmitry Torokhov > >>>>>>> > >>>> >Signed-off-by: Courtney Cavin > >>>>>>> > >>>> >--- > >>>>>>> > >>>> > > >>>>>>> > >>>> > drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_bus.c | 4 ++-- > >>>>>>> > >>>> > drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_bus.h | 2 +- > >>>>>>> > >>>> > drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_driver.c | 17 ++++++++++++----- > >>>>>>> > >>>> > drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_f11.c | 4 +++- > >>>>>>> > >>>> > 4 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > >>>>>>> > >>>> > > >>>>>>> > >>>> >diff --git a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_bus.c > >>>>>>> > >>>> >b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_bus.c > >>>>>>> > >>>> >index 96a76e7..8a939f3 100644 > >>>>>>> > >>>> >--- a/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_bus.c > >>>>>>> > >>>> >+++ b/drivers/input/rmi4/rmi_bus.c > >>>>>>> > >>>> >@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ static void rmi_release_device(struct > >>>>>>> > >>>> >device *dev) > >>>>>>> > >>>> > > >>>>>>> > >>>> > kfree(rmi_dev); > >>>>>>> > >>>> > > >>>>>>> > >>>> > } > >>>>>>> > >>>> > > >>>>>>> > >>>> >-struct device_type rmi_device_type = { > >>>>>>> > >>>> >+static struct device_type rmi_device_type = { > >>>>>>> > >>>> > > >>>>>>> > >>>> > .name = "rmi_sensor", > >>>>>>> > >>>> > .release = rmi_release_device, > >>>>>>> > >>>> > > >>>>>>> > >>>> > }; > >>>>> > >>> > >>>>> > >>>This struct is used by diagnostic modules to identify sensor > >>>>> > >>>devices, so it cannot be static. > >>> > > > >>> > >Then we need to declare it somewhere or provide an accessor function. > >> > > >> >Currently it's in a header not included in the patches. We'll move > >> >it to rmi_bus.h. > > > > Hmm, we do have rmi_is_physical_device() to identify whether it is a > > sensor or a function, so I believe we should mark all structures static > > to avoid anyone poking at them. > > I was poking around in the dependent code late last night and came to > the same conclusion. I'll send a micropatch later today to get it out > of the way. No need, I untangled relevant bits from the one Courtney sent. Thanks. -- Dmitry