From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] bfa: mark symbols static where possible Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2016 09:46:01 +0200 Message-ID: <4472099.0XASieJnNU@wuerfel> References: <201608031208.Y8UqZJYW%fengguang.wu@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.134]:65356 "EHLO mout.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754377AbcHCHxI (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Aug 2016 03:53:08 -0400 In-Reply-To: <201608031208.Y8UqZJYW%fengguang.wu@intel.com> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: kbuild test robot Cc: kbuild-all@01.org, Anil Gurumurthy , Sudarsana Kalluru , "James E . J . Bottomley" , "Martin K . Petersen" , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Baoyou Xie On Wednesday, August 3, 2016 12:45:50 PM CEST kbuild test robot wrote: > All errors (new ones prefixed by >>): > > drivers/scsi/bfa/bfad.c: In function 'bfad_drv_uninit': > >> drivers/scsi/bfa/bfad.c:888:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'bfa_isr_disable' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration] > bfa_isr_disable(&bfad->bfa); > ^ > cc1: some warnings being treated as errors > Ah right: This is called in a function that gets removed in patch 5, after which it is actually local. I made a mistake here when I went through a repeated search for local functions. I'll wait for other comments first before I send a fixed version. Arnd