From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAE4C168 for ; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 16:22:22 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1639758143; x=1671294143; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=wNBGXF/gVIsUUSL+KA7+A18FBMlEr0hXyOuboGlwIto=; b=lBCmQ1n6un+8DPm9qVVSe9PYhp7B4JHIcbOeUGoLFN/UIE1mvZDUt7Gh e3vMlIX4Z+X4Qs+x0MBDp5U5KGGU9fBbcFsSpcsxaKI19ugijep9CGj65 D0olKlOHZdFR1Qf+p3qqIu7CGkrcz72FzlB5Id4dMJHJLFJj6ZAaVrxHi sJT9/w9gXbWsdCr5fqpSUo3RygidNpCumNve059IQBvxPuGplYZQ9vrFV TYbyilcvC0JUP/pi65GD+14SJtq55sJatBl4affbqmjZ2QLgU08aQH2wV fF6ifDlTTMZ+NtBiNEWANqXFPqTUTIOmUbRN1AqSPTEkpdugGfigimZAy Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10201"; a="303157553" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,213,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="303157553" Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Dec 2021 08:22:22 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,213,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="756518301" Received: from lkp-server02.sh.intel.com (HELO 9f38c0981d9f) ([10.239.97.151]) by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 17 Dec 2021 08:22:19 -0800 Received: from kbuild by 9f38c0981d9f with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1myFzu-0004v1-FF; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 16:22:18 +0000 Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2021 00:21:35 +0800 From: kernel test robot To: Stefan Berger , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org Cc: kbuild-all@lists.01.org, zohar@linux.ibm.com, serge@hallyn.com, christian.brauner@ubuntu.com, containers@lists.linux.dev, dmitry.kasatkin@gmail.com, ebiederm@xmission.com, krzysztof.struczynski@huawei.com, roberto.sassu@huawei.com, mpeters@redhat.com Subject: [RFC PATCH] securityfs: securityfs_dir_inode_operations can be static Message-ID: <20211217162135.GA21682@93035147186e> References: <20211216054323.1707384-11-stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: containers@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20211216054323.1707384-11-stefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Patchwork-Hint: ignore User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) security/inode.c:43:31: warning: symbol 'securityfs_dir_inode_operations' was not declared. Should it be static? security/inode.c:48:31: warning: symbol 'securityfs_file_inode_operations' was not declared. Should it be static? Reported-by: kernel test robot Signed-off-by: kernel test robot --- inode.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/security/inode.c b/security/inode.c index a0d9f086e3d54..ff720c6bedb0a 100644 --- a/security/inode.c +++ b/security/inode.c @@ -40,12 +40,12 @@ static int securityfs_permission(struct user_namespace *mnt_userns, return err; } -const struct inode_operations securityfs_dir_inode_operations = { +static const struct inode_operations securityfs_dir_inode_operations = { .permission = securityfs_permission, .lookup = simple_lookup, }; -const struct inode_operations securityfs_file_inode_operations = { +static const struct inode_operations securityfs_file_inode_operations = { .permission = securityfs_permission, };