Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220328225628.3012397-1-linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk> <YkRPOM9GKo3tlxUh@sirena.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <YkRPOM9GKo3tlxUh@sirena.org.uk>
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Apr 2022 17:59:33 +0300
Message-ID: <CAHp75VdiBqJ_+1eewmgrdGpsYUr=+xLpeH+4B_rS4nDtc-fMYA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regmap: make range check functions static
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc:     Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Mar 30, 2022 at 11:17 PM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 12:56:28AM +0200, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> > regmap_reg_in_ranges() and regmap_check_range_table() have no callers
> > outside regmap.c, so they have no reason to be exported nor have
> > external linkage.
>
> These are intentional API in case someone needs them, no need to
> encourage open coding.

But currently it's not used and simply consumes namespace resources.
Isn't it our practice not to add dead code / etc?

In practice I assume that one will grep before implementing, or at
least at review stage it may be pointed out for a helper, that might
be exported when needed, no?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko