From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:39145 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751993AbcEZKOt (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 May 2016 06:14:49 -0400 Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: remove incorrect forward declaration To: Stefano Stabellini , Arnd Bergmann References: <1462972075-918938-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> Cc: Juergen Gross , Stefano Stabellini , Daniel Kiper , Paul Gortmaker , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Vitaly Kuznetsov , Julien Grall , Ross Lagerwall , David Vrabel , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Boris Ostrovsky , Andrew Morton From: Julien Grall Message-ID: <79d3b985-51a4-2a93-68a7-2ff968d92a93@arm.com> Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 11:14:44 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Stefano, On 16/05/2016 12:11, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > On Wed, 11 May 2016, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> A bugfix patch for the xen balloon driver introduced a forward >> declaration for a static function that is conditionally compiled, >> causing a warning if only the declaration but not the definition >> are there: >> >> drivers/xen/balloon.c:154:13: error: 'release_memory_resource' declared 'static' but never defined [-Werror=unused-function] >> static void release_memory_resource(struct resource *resource); >> >> This removes the declaration again and instead moves the function >> definition to the right place, before its first caller and inside >> of the #ifdef protecting both. >> >> The patch that introduced the warning is marked for stable >> backports, so if that gets applied to 4.4, so should this one. >> >> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann >> Fixes: dfd74a1edfab ("xen/balloon: Fix crash when ballooning on x86 32 bit PAE") >> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > Reviewed-by: Stefano Stabellini You have applied this patch to the branch for-linus-4.8 but not for-linus-4.7. Is it intentional? Regards, -- Julien Grall