[PATCH] drm/imagination: make pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops static

[PATCH] drm/imagination: make pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops static

[Ben Dooks]

The pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops is not used outside pvr_fw_trace.c
so make it static to avoid the following sparse warning:

drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c:74:31: warning: symbol 'pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?

Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c
index 6bb5baa6c41b..805d9f9bc1dd 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c
@@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_set(const char *val, const struct kernel_param *kp)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-const struct kernel_param_ops pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops = {
+static const struct kernel_param_ops pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops = {
 	.set = pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_set,
 	.get = param_get_hexint,
 };
-- 
2.37.2.352.g3c44437643

Re: [PATCH] drm/imagination: make pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops static

[Alessio Belle]

On Tue, 2026-06-23 at 11:53 +0100, Ben Dooks wrote:
> The pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops is not used outside pvr_fw_trace.c
> so make it static to avoid the following sparse warning:
> 
> drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c:74:31: warning: symbol 'pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>

Reviewed-by: Alessio Belle <alessio.belle@imgtec.com>

Thanks,
Alessio

> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c
> index 6bb5baa6c41b..805d9f9bc1dd 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c
> @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_set(const char *val, const struct kernel_param *kp)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> -const struct kernel_param_ops pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops = {
> +static const struct kernel_param_ops pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops = {
>  	.set = pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_set,
>  	.get = param_get_hexint,
>  };

Re: [PATCH] drm/imagination: make pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops static

[Alessio Belle]

Hi Ben,

On Mon, 2026-06-29 at 11:05 +0000, Alessio Belle wrote:
> On Tue, 2026-06-23 at 11:53 +0100, Ben Dooks wrote:
> > The pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops is not used outside pvr_fw_trace.c
> > so make it static to avoid the following sparse warning:
> > 
> > drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c:74:31: warning: symbol 'pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Alessio Belle <alessio.belle@imgtec.com>

Actually, could you add a Fixes tag pointing at c6978643ea1c ("drm/imagination:
Validate fw trace group_mask")? You can then add the Reviewed-by tag as well for
last.

Thanks,
Alessio

> 
> Thanks,
> Alessio
> 
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c
> > index 6bb5baa6c41b..805d9f9bc1dd 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c
> > @@ -71,7 +71,7 @@ pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_set(const char *val, const struct kernel_param *kp)
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> >  
> > -const struct kernel_param_ops pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops = {
> > +static const struct kernel_param_ops pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops = {
> >  	.set = pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_set,
> >  	.get = param_get_hexint,
> >  };
> 

Re: [PATCH] drm/imagination: make pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops static

[Ben Dooks]

On 01/07/2026 19:18, Alessio Belle wrote:
> Hi Ben,
> 
> On Mon, 2026-06-29 at 11:05 +0000, Alessio Belle wrote:
>> On Tue, 2026-06-23 at 11:53 +0100, Ben Dooks wrote:
>>> The pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops is not used outside pvr_fw_trace.c
>>> so make it static to avoid the following sparse warning:
>>>
>>> drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c:74:31: warning: symbol 'pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Alessio Belle <alessio.belle@imgtec.com>
> 
> Actually, could you add a Fixes tag pointing at c6978643ea1c ("drm/imagination:
> Validate fw trace group_mask")? You can then add the Reviewed-by tag as well for
> last.
> 
> Thanks,
> Alessio

ok, done


-- 
Ben Dooks				http://www.codethink.co.uk/
Senior Engineer				Codethink - Providing Genius

https://www.codethink.co.uk/privacy.html

Re: [PATCH] drm/imagination: make pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops static

[Ben Dooks]

On 23/06/2026 11:53, Ben Dooks wrote:
> The pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops is not used outside pvr_fw_trace.c
> so make it static to avoid the following sparse warning:
> 
> drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c:74:31: warning: symbol 'pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
> 

FYI the Matt.Coster@imgtec.com is reporting recipient failure.

Does this need changing or removing?

-- 
Ben Dooks				http://www.codethink.co.uk/
Senior Engineer				Codethink - Providing Genius

https://www.codethink.co.uk/privacy.html

Re: [PATCH] drm/imagination: make pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops static

[Alessio Belle]

Hi Ben,

On Fri, 2026-07-03 at 17:35 +0100, Ben Dooks wrote:
> On 23/06/2026 11:53, Ben Dooks wrote:
> > The pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops is not used outside pvr_fw_trace.c
> > so make it static to avoid the following sparse warning:
> > 
> > drivers/gpu/drm/imagination/pvr_fw_trace.c:74:31: warning: symbol 'pvr_fw_trace_init_mask_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
> > 
> 
> FYI the Matt.Coster@imgtec.com is reporting recipient failure.
> 
> Does this need changing or removing?
> 

Matt has (unfortunately for us) left Imagination very recently. Maintainers list
and mailmap have been updated on drm-misc-next, so once those changes have
propagated this should sort itself for new patch series at least.

Thanks,
Alessio