From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,T_DKIM_INVALID, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD344C43142 for ; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 00:22:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60A2C24A3C for ; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 00:22:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="OnAkh+Bo" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 60A2C24A3C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934465AbeFWAWm (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jun 2018 20:22:42 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.133]:41222 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934358AbeFWAWl (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Jun 2018 20:22:41 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version :References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=FaFggJwTUCggsC2o3Cn8emuuzUewcEx6BKdZuel9ues=; b=OnAkh+BotfEhABYsp59ElZyhy Wsl7E/yiazZalJbQ8GPwHfXiKml7Qr6a9ht42EboP+4Lt5IXhmCMa99In6pXFf1vqUNOZFx5sksk+ ACU8vDrMbLvmgg+X7zByjU/6j6r4toclNuGJYgC3nhMWcoLjXQ1wEUdlzRTJUZYV2xlbXwcOMBYhI 8imv+3QbC214gyPw/XLCVWQikK0AkqE+14f7OHpyH7NcgmkBjxjYZUkATADwMaTpiExd2RZ4Vj2JY Hfnl7EA8DAbr8F9XCps/zCOOHFIPNiCliA3J/Sytj4k/U3ORnTpr4+EW6ekjwl4S39Hz4jG49kQ8C 3R68PBlaw==; Received: from dvhart by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1fWWK7-0003cK-0G; Sat, 23 Jun 2018 00:22:39 +0000 Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 17:22:37 -0700 From: Darren Hart To: Colin King Cc: Mario Limonciello , Andy Shevchenko , platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: dell-smbios: make a function and a pointer static Message-ID: <20180623002237.GG27466@fury> References: <20180621181524.30550-1-colin.king@canonical.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180621181524.30550-1-colin.king@canonical.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.0 (2018-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 21, 2018 at 07:15:24PM +0100, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King > > The function dell_smbios_smm_call and pointer platform_device are > local to the source and do not need to be in global scope, so make > them static. > > Cleans up sparse warnings: > warning: symbol 'platform_device' was not declared. Should it be static? > warning: symbol 'dell_smbios_smm_call' was not declared. Should it be > static? > > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King > --- > drivers/platform/x86/dell-smbios-smm.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/dell-smbios-smm.c b/drivers/platform/x86/dell-smbios-smm.c > index e9e9da556318..97a90bebc360 100644 > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/dell-smbios-smm.c > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/dell-smbios-smm.c > @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ > static int da_command_address; > static int da_command_code; > static struct calling_interface_buffer *buffer; > -struct platform_device *platform_device; > +static struct platform_device *platform_device; > static DEFINE_MUTEX(smm_mutex); > > static const struct dmi_system_id dell_device_table[] __initconst = { > @@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ static void find_cmd_address(const struct dmi_header *dm, void *dummy) > } > } > > -int dell_smbios_smm_call(struct calling_interface_buffer *input) > +static int dell_smbios_smm_call(struct calling_interface_buffer *input) Hrm. So these are passed by pointer to dell_smbios_register_device(), which is in turn called by dell_smbios_call() from dell-smbios-base.c. So while it is valid to make these static, since we're not referencing the symbol, but the pointer value instead - I do worry about the "static" suggesting to someone reading the code that this data is not used outside of this file, when it is. I'm not finding a position on this in coding-style. Andy, do you care to weigh in on this? -- Darren Hart VMware Open Source Technology Center