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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61620C433EF for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 19:00:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S245715AbhLJTDz (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:03:55 -0500 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:54482 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237589AbhLJTDy (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:03:54 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1639162819; x=1670698819; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mime-version; bh=CnTlDxz1/sH4dBADN+Rg7wetQcW+/sxhCFUXF0b01Ys=; b=nmKZSzUxQqjp0+KZUykTK7ca3Rncddil9+YkzLVuxHSO+td/ZcbzjBuA Jl1WZ8VIFYJi57iTXVPA7kZho7DzUeZimLAAG4rg+zi68cB8i7ppdPDvn oJluWUrMeH2m1xtzExVn59SejpS16+X8Q8MtW0ppULf+WDC3L6x4kpyLC BmFgI1toVZw2LFfALITGUoVqiaoJcaipp0KFQ0YjJVECndwNJUP1aiusz IpC4fGwzJeYraW01MIJVQ1iZh2kJZCCDHh4engV3MyTqUrfBU9VDCH0gU ip5amDkJNxYBm2RCHrU6Lbk4sWHHdalX7/QkXgN7N7r+0U3UM9Dz/BgNc A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10194"; a="235931591" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,196,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="235931591" Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Dec 2021 11:00:18 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,196,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="462640231" Received: from lkp-server02.sh.intel.com (HELO 9e1e9f9b3bcb) ([10.239.97.151]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Dec 2021 11:00:16 -0800 Received: from kbuild by 9e1e9f9b3bcb with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mvl7v-0003Zx-EZ; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 19:00:15 +0000 Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2021 02:59:43 +0800 From: kernel test robot To: Lukas Czerner Cc: kbuild-all@lists.01.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 0day robot Subject: [RFC PATCH] ext4: ext4_modify_primary_sb() can be static Message-ID: <20211210185943.GA39725@eb09551c7cec> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Patchwork-Hint: ignore User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org fs/ext4/ioctl.c:45:5: warning: symbol 'ext4_modify_primary_sb' was not declared. Should it be static? fs/ext4/ioctl.c:165:5: warning: symbol 'ext4_modify_superblocks_fn' was not declared. Should it be static? Reported-by: kernel test robot Signed-off-by: kernel test robot --- ioctl.c | 12 ++++++------ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/ext4/ioctl.c b/fs/ext4/ioctl.c index 285862288ecb5..5f5c0e62e4d3d 100644 --- a/fs/ext4/ioctl.c +++ b/fs/ext4/ioctl.c @@ -42,9 +42,9 @@ static void ext4_sb_setlabel(struct ext4_super_block *es, const void *arg) memcpy(es->s_volume_name, (char *)arg, EXT4_LABEL_MAX); } -int ext4_modify_primary_sb(struct super_block *sb, handle_t *handle, - ext4_modify_sb_callback func, - const void *arg) +static int ext4_modify_primary_sb(struct super_block *sb, handle_t *handle, + ext4_modify_sb_callback func, + const void *arg) { int err = 0; struct ext4_sb_info *sbi = EXT4_SB(sb); @@ -162,9 +162,9 @@ static int ext4_update_backup_sb(struct super_block *sb, handle_t *handle, * This is safe because e2fsck will re-write them if there is a problem, * and we're very unlikely to ever need more than two backups. */ -int ext4_modify_superblocks_fn(struct super_block *sb, - ext4_modify_sb_callback func, - const void *arg) +static int ext4_modify_superblocks_fn(struct super_block *sb, + ext4_modify_sb_callback func, + const void *arg) { handle_t *handle; ext4_group_t ngroups;