From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754701Ab3CCWt2 (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Mar 2013 17:49:28 -0500 Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:57032 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754503Ab3CCWt0 (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Mar 2013 17:49:26 -0500 Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2013 17:49:25 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <20130303.174925.982387903456722818.davem@davemloft.net> To: silviupopescu1990@gmail.com Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, sjur.brandeland@stericsson.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] CAIF: fix sparse warning for caif_usb From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <1362316188-2927-1-git-send-email-silviupopescu1990@gmail.com> References: <1362316188-2927-1-git-send-email-silviupopescu1990@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5 on Emacs 24.1 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (shards.monkeyblade.net [0.0.0.0]); Sun, 03 Mar 2013 14:49:30 -0800 (PST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Silviu-Mihai Popescu Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2013 15:09:48 +0200 > This fixes the following sparse warning: > net/caif/caif_usb.c:84:16: warning: symbol 'cfusbl_create' was not > declared. Should it be static? > > Signed-off-by: Silviu-Mihai Popescu > --- > net/caif/caif_usb.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/net/caif/caif_usb.c b/net/caif/caif_usb.c > index 3ebc8cb..cbae9b0 100644 > --- a/net/caif/caif_usb.c > +++ b/net/caif/caif_usb.c > @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ static void cfusbl_ctrlcmd(struct cflayer *layr, enum caif_ctrlcmd ctrl, > layr->up->ctrlcmd(layr->up, ctrl, layr->id); > } > > -struct cflayer *cfusbl_create(int phyid, u8 ethaddr[ETH_ALEN], > +static struct cflayer *cfusbl_create(int phyid, u8 ethaddr[ETH_ALEN], > u8 braddr[ETH_ALEN]) You need to fix up the indentation of the second line of function arguments if you move the location of the openning parenthesis on the first line, because all arguments on the second and subsequent line must line up exactly at the first column after the openning parenthesis of the first line. Thanks.