From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A9A37CA4 for ; Mon, 23 May 2016 09:44:29 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78335AC003 for ; Mon, 23 May 2016 07:44:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id W4SxBFG5XXyod8C8 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 23 May 2016 07:44:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 07:44:25 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: make several functions static Message-ID: <20160523144425.GA9319@infradead.org> References: <3ec4e394-1885-6f3e-f909-c9a77a72668b@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3ec4e394-1885-6f3e-f909-c9a77a72668b@sandeen.net> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Eric Sandeen Cc: xfs-oss On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 02:16:25PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Al Viro noticed that xfs_lock_inodes should be static, and > that led to ... a few more. > > These are just the easy ones, others require moving functions > higher in source files, so that's not done here to keep > this review simple. > > Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen > --- > > We aren't using STATIC anymore ... right? We're moving away from it at least, although not very stringently.. > FWIW cross-applying to xfsprogs picks up a handful of these > as well, and it's still happy too. Yeah - seems like none of them is of the odd static in kernel but not in xfsprogs kind. Looks fine, Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs