Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751371AbdGQTex (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jul 2017 15:34:53 -0400 Received: from mail-qk0-f193.google.com ([209.85.220.193]:32918 "EHLO mail-qk0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751316AbdGQTev (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jul 2017 15:34:51 -0400 From: "Jingoo Han" To: "'Joao Pinto'" , "'Carlos Palminha'" , , Cc: References: <20170717131334.1761-1-palminha@synopsys.com> <18cf8549-c1c6-bed2-60f2-202abc06d6b3@synopsys.com> In-Reply-To: <18cf8549-c1c6-bed2-60f2-202abc06d6b3@synopsys.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: dwc: designware: make dw_pcie_prog_*_atu_unroll() static Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 15:34:48 -0400 Message-ID: <000c01d2ff33$c1202510$43606f30$@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Content-Language: en-us Thread-Index: AQF5jUmE4Y67yiQ1ZQqN6cIB+H8xMQGm8DKlov4VFpA= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by nfs id v6HJYw1r000511 Content-Length: 1953 Lines: 65 On Monday, July 17, 2017 9:28 AM, Joao Pinto wrote: > > > 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 Acked-by: Jingoo Han Best regards, Jingoo Han