Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/platform/uv/BAU: minor cleanup, make some local
 functions static
To: Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, <x86@kernel.org>,
        Andrew Banman <abanman@hpe.com>, Mike Travis <mike.travis@hpe.com>,
        Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>
References: <20170703142258.18240-1-colin.king@canonical.com>
CC: <kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
From: Dou Liyang <douly.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Message-ID: <86c2556c-cc0e-b221-b81e-4433b61f0f82@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2017 11:49:30 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170703142258.18240-1-colin.king@canonical.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2855
Lines: 78

Hi Colin,

At 07/03/2017 10:22 PM, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
>
> Functions normal_busy, handle_uv2_busy, uv_flush_send_and_wait and
> find_another_by_swack are local to the source, so make them static
>
> Fixes various smatch warnings, such as:
> "symbol 'find_another_by_swack' was not declared. Should it be static?"
> "symbol 'handle_uv2_busy' was not declared. Should it be static?"
>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/platform/uv/tlb_uv.c | 11 ++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/uv/tlb_uv.c b/arch/x86/platform/uv/tlb_uv.c
> index 2983faab5b18..730b47dce402 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/uv/tlb_uv.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/uv/tlb_uv.c
> @@ -595,7 +595,7 @@ static unsigned long uv2_3_read_status(unsigned long offset, int rshft, int desc
>   * The bit provided by the activation_status_2 register is irrelevant to
>   * the status if it is only being tested for busy or not busy.
>   */
> -int normal_busy(struct bau_control *bcp)
> +static int normal_busy(struct bau_control *bcp)

In my opinion, there is no need to mark *normal_busy* static, remove it
directly.

the commit c5d35d399e68(x86/UV2: Work around BAU bug) add it to
handle_uv2_busy(), but the handle_uv2_busy() is rewritten now. the
normal_busy is unused, can be remove.

By the way, there are also an other function named
uv_bau_message_interrupt() can be remove.


Thanks,

	dou.

>  {
>  	int cpu = bcp->uvhub_cpu;
>  	int mmr_offset;
> @@ -612,7 +612,7 @@ int normal_busy(struct bau_control *bcp)
>   * of a hardware bug.
>   * Workaround the bug.
>   */
> -int handle_uv2_busy(struct bau_control *bcp)
> +static int handle_uv2_busy(struct bau_control *bcp)
>  {
>  	struct ptc_stats *stat = bcp->statp;
>
> @@ -917,7 +917,8 @@ static void handle_cmplt(int completion_status, struct bau_desc *bau_desc,
>   * Returns 1 if it gives up entirely and the original cpu mask is to be
>   * returned to the kernel.
>   */
> -int uv_flush_send_and_wait(struct cpumask *flush_mask, struct bau_control *bcp,
> +static int uv_flush_send_and_wait(struct cpumask *flush_mask,
> +	struct bau_control *bcp,
>  	struct bau_desc *bau_desc)
>  {
>  	int seq_number = 0;
> @@ -1212,8 +1213,8 @@ const struct cpumask *uv_flush_tlb_others(const struct cpumask *cpumask,
>   * Search the message queue for any 'other' unprocessed message with the
>   * same software acknowledge resource bit vector as the 'msg' message.
>   */
> -struct bau_pq_entry *find_another_by_swack(struct bau_pq_entry *msg,
> -					   struct bau_control *bcp)
> +static struct bau_pq_entry *find_another_by_swack(struct bau_pq_entry *msg,
> +						  struct bau_control *bcp)
>  {
>  	struct bau_pq_entry *msg_next = msg + 1;
>  	unsigned char swack_vec = msg->swack_vec;
>