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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A94DC04E84 for ; Tue, 28 May 2019 10:49:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7FCE2081C for ; Tue, 28 May 2019 10:49:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726788AbfE1KtW (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 May 2019 06:49:22 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52738 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726437AbfE1KtU (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 May 2019 06:49:20 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B3B7F3086224; Tue, 28 May 2019 10:49:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.10.66.2] (ovpn-66-2.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.66.2]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96D8E5D6A9; Tue, 28 May 2019 10:49:15 +0000 (UTC) From: "Benjamin Coddington" To: YueHaibing , bfields@fieldses.org Cc: jlayton@kernel.org, trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com, anna.schumaker@netapp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] lockd: Make two symbols static Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 06:49:13 -0400 Message-ID: <97D052EC-1F07-4210-81CC-7E0085C095BD@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20190528090652.13288-1-yuehaibing@huawei.com> References: <20190528090652.13288-1-yuehaibing@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.42]); Tue, 28 May 2019 10:49:20 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Maintainers, what's the best thing to do here: fold these into another patch version and post it (add attribution)? Add it as another patch at the end of the series? I have learned my lesson: add sparse to my workflow. Ben On 28 May 2019, at 5:06, YueHaibing wrote: > Fix sparse warnings: > > fs/lockd/clntproc.c:57:6: warning: symbol 'nlmclnt_put_lockowner' was > not declared. Should it be static? > fs/lockd/svclock.c:409:35: warning: symbol 'nlmsvc_lock_ops' was not > declared. Should it be static? > > Reported-by: Hulk Robot > Signed-off-by: YueHaibing > --- > fs/lockd/clntproc.c | 2 +- > fs/lockd/svclock.c | 2 +- > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/lockd/clntproc.c b/fs/lockd/clntproc.c > index 0ff8ad4..b11f2af 100644 > --- a/fs/lockd/clntproc.c > +++ b/fs/lockd/clntproc.c > @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ nlmclnt_get_lockowner(struct nlm_lockowner > *lockowner) > return lockowner; > } > > -void nlmclnt_put_lockowner(struct nlm_lockowner *lockowner) > +static void nlmclnt_put_lockowner(struct nlm_lockowner *lockowner) > { > if (!refcount_dec_and_lock(&lockowner->count, > &lockowner->host->h_lock)) > return; > diff --git a/fs/lockd/svclock.c b/fs/lockd/svclock.c > index 5f9f19b..61d3cc2 100644 > --- a/fs/lockd/svclock.c > +++ b/fs/lockd/svclock.c > @@ -406,7 +406,7 @@ static void nlmsvc_locks_release_private(struct > file_lock *fl) > nlmsvc_put_lockowner((struct nlm_lockowner *)fl->fl_owner); > } > > -const struct file_lock_operations nlmsvc_lock_ops = { > +static const struct file_lock_operations nlmsvc_lock_ops = { > .fl_copy_lock = nlmsvc_locks_copy_lock, > .fl_release_private = nlmsvc_locks_release_private, > }; > -- > 2.7.4