Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751550AbdGQN2F (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jul 2017 09:28:05 -0400 Received: from smtprelay.synopsys.com ([198.182.60.111]:59153 "EHLO smtprelay.synopsys.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751359AbdGQN2D (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jul 2017 09:28:03 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: dwc: designware: make dw_pcie_prog_*_atu_unroll() static To: Carlos Palminha , , CC: , , References: <20170717131334.1761-1-palminha@synopsys.com> From: Joao Pinto Message-ID: <18cf8549-c1c6-bed2-60f2-202abc06d6b3@synopsys.com> Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 14:27:58 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170717131334.1761-1-palminha@synopsys.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: pt-PT Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.107.19.59] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1718 Lines: 47 Hi Carlos, Às 2:13 PM de 7/17/2017, Carlos Palminha escreveu: > Helper functions dw_pcie_prog_*_atu_unroll don't need to be in global scope, > so make it static. > > Cleans up sparse warnings: > - symbol 'dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu_unroll' was not declared. Should it be static? > - symbol 'dw_pcie_prog_inbound_atu_unroll' was not declared. Should it be static? > > Signed-off-by: Carlos Palminha > --- > Patch made against linux-next tree, tag next-20170714 > > drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-designware.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-designware.c b/drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-designware.c > index 0e03af279259..48d6d0712ea8 100644 > --- a/drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-designware.c > +++ b/drivers/pci/dwc/pcie-designware.c > @@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ static void dw_pcie_writel_ob_unroll(struct dw_pcie *pci, u32 index, u32 reg, > dw_pcie_writel_dbi(pci, offset + reg, val); > } > > -void dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu_unroll(struct dw_pcie *pci, int index, int type, > +static void dw_pcie_prog_outbound_atu_unroll(struct dw_pcie *pci, int index, int type, > u64 cpu_addr, u64 pci_addr, u32 size) > { > u32 retries, val; > @@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ static void dw_pcie_writel_ib_unroll(struct dw_pcie *pci, u32 index, u32 reg, > dw_pcie_writel_dbi(pci, offset + reg, val); > } > > -int dw_pcie_prog_inbound_atu_unroll(struct dw_pcie *pci, int index, int bar, > +static int dw_pcie_prog_inbound_atu_unroll(struct dw_pcie *pci, int index, int bar, > u64 cpu_addr, enum dw_pcie_as_type as_type) > { > int type; > -- > 2.11.0 > That indeed escaped in the refactoring :) Thanks! Acked-by: Joao Pinto