From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
To: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@lists.codethink.co.uk,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>,
rcu@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rcu: add declarations of undeclared items
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 21:44:30 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191012044430.GG2689@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191011170824.30228-1-ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 06:08:24PM +0100, Ben Dooks wrote:
> The rcu_state, rcu_rnp_online_cpus and rcu_dynticks_curr_cpu_in_eqs
> do not have declarations in a header. Add these to remove the
> following sparse warnings:
>
> kernel/rcu/tree.c:87:18: warning: symbol 'rcu_state' was not declared. Should it be static?
> kernel/rcu/tree.c:191:15: warning: symbol 'rcu_rnp_online_cpus' was not declared. Should it be static?
> kernel/rcu/tree.c:297:6: warning: symbol 'rcu_dynticks_curr_cpu_in_eqs' was not declared. Should it be static?
>
> Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>
Good catch!
However, these guys (plus one more) are actually used only in the
kernel/rcu/tree.o translation unit, so they can be marked static.
I made this change as shown below with your Reported-by.
Seem reasonable?
Thanx, Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
commit 02995691aa76f3e52599d4f9d9d1ab23c3574f32
Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Date: Fri Oct 11 21:40:09 2019 -0700
rcu: Mark non-global functions and variables as static
Each of rcu_state, rcu_rnp_online_cpus(), rcu_dynticks_curr_cpu_in_eqs(),
and rcu_dynticks_snap() are used only in the kernel/rcu/tree.o translation
unit, and may thus be marked static. This commit therefore makes this
change.
Reported-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.c b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
index b18fa3d..278798e 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.c
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.c
@@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU_SHARED_ALIGNED(struct rcu_data, rcu_data) = {
.dynticks_nmi_nesting = DYNTICK_IRQ_NONIDLE,
.dynticks = ATOMIC_INIT(RCU_DYNTICK_CTRL_CTR),
};
-struct rcu_state rcu_state = {
+static struct rcu_state rcu_state = {
.level = { &rcu_state.node[0] },
.gp_state = RCU_GP_IDLE,
.gp_seq = (0UL - 300UL) << RCU_SEQ_CTR_SHIFT,
@@ -189,7 +189,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rcu_get_gp_kthreads_prio);
* held, but the bit corresponding to the current CPU will be stable
* in most contexts.
*/
-unsigned long rcu_rnp_online_cpus(struct rcu_node *rnp)
+static unsigned long rcu_rnp_online_cpus(struct rcu_node *rnp)
{
return READ_ONCE(rnp->qsmaskinitnext);
}
@@ -295,7 +295,7 @@ static void rcu_dynticks_eqs_online(void)
*
* No ordering, as we are sampling CPU-local information.
*/
-bool rcu_dynticks_curr_cpu_in_eqs(void)
+static bool rcu_dynticks_curr_cpu_in_eqs(void)
{
struct rcu_data *rdp = this_cpu_ptr(&rcu_data);
@@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ bool rcu_dynticks_curr_cpu_in_eqs(void)
* Snapshot the ->dynticks counter with full ordering so as to allow
* stable comparison of this counter with past and future snapshots.
*/
-int rcu_dynticks_snap(struct rcu_data *rdp)
+static int rcu_dynticks_snap(struct rcu_data *rdp)
{
int snap = atomic_add_return(0, &rdp->dynticks);
diff --git a/kernel/rcu/tree.h b/kernel/rcu/tree.h
index 1540542..f8e6c70 100644
--- a/kernel/rcu/tree.h
+++ b/kernel/rcu/tree.h
@@ -402,8 +402,6 @@ static const char *tp_rcu_varname __used __tracepoint_string = rcu_name;
#define RCU_NAME rcu_name
#endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_TRACING */
-int rcu_dynticks_snap(struct rcu_data *rdp);
-
/* Forward declarations for tree_plugin.h */
static void rcu_bootup_announce(void);
static void rcu_qs(void);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-12 4:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-11 17:08 [PATCH] rcu: add declarations of undeclared items Ben Dooks
2019-10-12 4:44 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2019-10-14 7:16 ` Ben Dooks
2019-10-14 17:51 ` Joel Fernandes
2019-10-15 1:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191012044430.GG2689@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72 \
--to=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@lists.codethink.co.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=rcu@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox