Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
To:     akpm@linux-foundation.org, dianders@chromium.org, pmladek@suse.com,
        kernelfans@gmail.com, lecopzer.chen@mediatek.com,
        ldufour@linux.ibm.com
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
Subject: [PATCH] watchdog: set variables watchdog_soft,hardlockup_user_enabled storage-class-specifier to static
Date:   Tue, 23 May 2023 08:23:24 -0400
Message-Id: <20230523122324.1668396-1-trix@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

smatch reports
kernel/watchdog.c:40:19: warning: symbol
  'watchdog_hardlockup_user_enabled' was not declared. Should it be static?
kernel/watchdog.c:41:19: warning: symbol
  'watchdog_softlockup_user_enabled' was not declared. Should it be static?

These variabled are only used in their defining file, so it should be static.

Signed-off-by: Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>
---
 kernel/watchdog.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/watchdog.c b/kernel/watchdog.c
index 877d8670f26e..237990e8d345 100644
--- a/kernel/watchdog.c
+++ b/kernel/watchdog.c
@@ -37,8 +37,8 @@ static DEFINE_MUTEX(watchdog_mutex);
 
 unsigned long __read_mostly watchdog_enabled;
 int __read_mostly watchdog_user_enabled = 1;
-int __read_mostly watchdog_hardlockup_user_enabled = WATCHDOG_HARDLOCKUP_DEFAULT;
-int __read_mostly watchdog_softlockup_user_enabled = 1;
+static int __read_mostly watchdog_hardlockup_user_enabled = WATCHDOG_HARDLOCKUP_DEFAULT;
+static int __read_mostly watchdog_softlockup_user_enabled = 1;
 int __read_mostly watchdog_thresh = 10;
 static int __read_mostly watchdog_hardlockup_available;
 
-- 
2.27.0