[PATCH f2fs] f2fs: f2fs_write_cache_pages() can be static

[PATCH f2fs] f2fs: f2fs_write_cache_pages() can be static

[kbuild test robot]

Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
---
 data.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
index 1724986..ea13e3e 100644
--- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
+++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
@@ -1133,7 +1133,7 @@ static int __f2fs_writepage(struct page *page, struct writeback_control *wbc,
  * The major change is making write step of cold data page separately from
  * warm/hot data page.
  */
-int f2fs_write_cache_pages(struct address_space *mapping,
+static int f2fs_write_cache_pages(struct address_space *mapping,
 		      struct writeback_control *wbc, writepage_t writepage,
 		      void *data)
 {

[f2fs:dev-test 24/27] fs/f2fs/data.c:1136:5: sparse: symbol 'f2fs_write_cache_pages' was not declared. Should it be static?

[kbuild test robot]

tree:   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jaegeuk/f2fs dev-test
head:   ac8132095a69bd62e30a505212627e2657740452
commit: 7e4a4d93dd6faf05d6201423d21ae8a00e538a2c [24/27] f2fs: expose f2fs_write_cache_pages
reproduce:
  # apt-get install sparse
  git checkout 7e4a4d93dd6faf05d6201423d21ae8a00e538a2c
  make ARCH=x86_64 allmodconfig
  make C=1 CF=-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__


sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>)

>> fs/f2fs/data.c:1136:5: sparse: symbol 'f2fs_write_cache_pages' was not declared. Should it be static?

Please review and possibly fold the followup patch.

---
0-DAY kernel test infrastructure                Open Source Technology Center
https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all                   Intel Corporation

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't Limit Your Business. Reach for the Cloud.
GigeNET's Cloud Solutions provide you with the tools and support that
you need to offload your IT needs and focus on growing your business.
Configured For All Businesses. Start Your Cloud Today.
https://www.gigenetcloud.com/

Re: [PATCH f2fs] f2fs: f2fs_write_cache_pages() can be static

[Jaegeuk Kim]

Merged this into the original patch.
Thanks,

On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 08:23:34AM +0800, kbuild test robot wrote:
> 
> Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
> ---
>  data.c |    2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/f2fs/data.c b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> index 1724986..ea13e3e 100644
> --- a/fs/f2fs/data.c
> +++ b/fs/f2fs/data.c
> @@ -1133,7 +1133,7 @@ static int __f2fs_writepage(struct page *page, struct writeback_control *wbc,
>   * The major change is making write step of cold data page separately from
>   * warm/hot data page.
>   */
> -int f2fs_write_cache_pages(struct address_space *mapping,
> +static int f2fs_write_cache_pages(struct address_space *mapping,
>  		      struct writeback_control *wbc, writepage_t writepage,
>  		      void *data)
>  {

RE: [f2fs:dev-test 24/27] fs/f2fs/data.c:1136:5: sparse: symbol 'f2fs_write_cache_pages' was not declared. Should it be static?

[Chao Yu]

Hi Fengguang,

Thanks for your reminder. Issue was fixed.

Regards,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: kbuild test robot [mailto:fengguang.wu@intel.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 8:24 AM
> To: Chao Yu
> Cc: kbuild-all@01.org; Jaegeuk Kim; Changman Lee; linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net;
> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: [f2fs:dev-test 24/27] fs/f2fs/data.c:1136:5: sparse: symbol 'f2fs_write_cache_pages'
> was not declared. Should it be static?
> 
> tree:   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jaegeuk/f2fs dev-test
> head:   ac8132095a69bd62e30a505212627e2657740452
> commit: 7e4a4d93dd6faf05d6201423d21ae8a00e538a2c [24/27] f2fs: expose f2fs_write_cache_pages
> reproduce:
>   # apt-get install sparse
>   git checkout 7e4a4d93dd6faf05d6201423d21ae8a00e538a2c
>   make ARCH=x86_64 allmodconfig
>   make C=1 CF=-D__CHECK_ENDIAN__
> 
> 
> sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>)
> 
> >> fs/f2fs/data.c:1136:5: sparse: symbol 'f2fs_write_cache_pages' was not declared. Should it
> be static?
> 
> Please review and possibly fold the followup patch.
> 
> ---
> 0-DAY kernel test infrastructure                Open Source Technology Center
> https://lists.01.org/pipermail/kbuild-all                   Intel Corporation