We get 2 warnings when building kernel with W=1:
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a3xx_gpu.c:535:17: warning: no previous prototype for 'a3xx_gpu_init' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/a4xx_gpu.c:624:17: warning: no previous prototype for 'a4xx_gpu_init' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
In fact, both functions are declared in
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_device.c, but should be declared
in a header file. So this patch moves both function declarations to
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_gpu.h.
Signed-off-by: Baoyou Xie <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_device.c | 3 ---
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_gpu.h | 3 +++
2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_device.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_device.c
index 5127b75..7250ffc 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_device.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_device.c
@@ -25,9 +25,6 @@ bool hang_debug = false;
MODULE_PARM_DESC(hang_debug, "Dump registers when hang is detected (can be slow!)");
module_param_named(hang_debug, hang_debug, bool, 0600);
-struct msm_gpu *a3xx_gpu_init(struct drm_device *dev);
-struct msm_gpu *a4xx_gpu_init(struct drm_device *dev);
-
static const struct adreno_info gpulist[] = {
{
.rev = ADRENO_REV(3, 0, 5, ANY_ID),
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_gpu.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_gpu.h
index a54f6e0..07d99bd 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_gpu.h
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/adreno/adreno_gpu.h
@@ -311,4 +311,7 @@ static inline void adreno_gpu_write(struct adreno_gpu *gpu,
gpu_write(&gpu->base, reg - 1, data);
}
+struct msm_gpu *a3xx_gpu_init(struct drm_device *dev);
+struct msm_gpu *a4xx_gpu_init(struct drm_device *dev);
+
#endif /* __ADRENO_GPU_H__ */
--
2.7.4
We get 2 warnings when building kernel with W=1:
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c:141:5: warning: no previous prototype for 'msm_debugfs_init' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c:158:6: warning: no previous prototype for 'msm_debugfs_cleanup' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
In fact, these functions are declared in
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.h.
So this patch adds missing header dependencies.
Signed-off-by: Baoyou Xie <[email protected]>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c
index 663f2b6..3c85373 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
#include "msm_drv.h"
#include "msm_gpu.h"
+#include "msm_debugfs.h"
static int msm_gpu_show(struct drm_device *dev, struct seq_file *m)
{
--
2.7.4
On Saturday, October 22, 2016 5:17:45 PM CEST Baoyou Xie wrote:
> We get 2 warnings when building kernel with W=1:
> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c:141:5: warning: no previous prototype for 'msm_debugfs_init' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c:158:6: warning: no previous prototype for 'msm_debugfs_cleanup' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
>
> In fact, these functions are declared in
> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.h.
> So this patch adds missing header dependencies.
>
> Signed-off-by: Baoyou Xie <[email protected]>
>
Both patches
Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>
Strangely, something caused the second mail to show up as a reply to the
first. No idea how that happened, but you may want to check the procedure
you used for sending the mails.
Arnd
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 12:13:40PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Saturday, October 22, 2016 5:17:45 PM CEST Baoyou Xie wrote:
> > We get 2 warnings when building kernel with W=1:
> > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c:141:5: warning: no previous prototype for 'msm_debugfs_init' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
> > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.c:158:6: warning: no previous prototype for 'msm_debugfs_cleanup' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
> >
> > In fact, these functions are declared in
> > drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_debugfs.h.
> > So this patch adds missing header dependencies.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Baoyou Xie <[email protected]>
> >
>
> Both patches
>
> Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>
Both applied to drm-misc, thanks.
> Strangely, something caused the second mail to show up as a reply to the
> first. No idea how that happened, but you may want to check the procedure
> you used for sending the mails.
Not generated as a series, but individual patches, but then send out using
just 1 invocation of git send-email? "add" sorts before "adreno", and git
format-patch changes every non-alphanumeric character to a '-'.
-Daniel
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch