Received: by 2002:a25:ab43:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id u61csp5143149ybi; Tue, 28 May 2019 08:14:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzTHeDREUgrGSxcpbzSz7c9tZKWSjX9YVT5p5fSCJXi90VxolAZti3o6YyjyQeniOvzhvVT X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:2308:: with SMTP id f8mr6431206pje.123.1559056451478; Tue, 28 May 2019 08:14:11 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1559056451; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=zzETO7VZfdR7VMGnNUmLrdoQQ2MlRgQMemiz11KCq1bFQLf3Wq06jd2Es6mJq5jxpy c39YAJCXSR27ZjQ9PWaWpj3xmpGnlDyVSh7I1whbV+BtJRaqkZAdCTeUjItaiQP6v/i0 o2hM31kN+81/P43jgLRCUkWNTti7cnAI+fAN2JGJ8Tr0d7O95mDB7StYIuOcuo337MLB /lj+Kctgx1tVUvwihFWG+M8IQ0YOPL2zsX5Jlkfs6mvOll7kt21fd99/anDiLpOE+nF6 0qfvQnoV3f/9P6Ac07wCkI1rF7cYiCmV296SHCGqUctts0T0Pj6eYXaWAGkDmoybJ0QK N18A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=tITwO1eqkMIiEdWmvmkHK0pJK9FOJJIKWb3rlyD/j50=; b=ow9iSSqDt9vuFsijXeKIrZ1XvD/H4OeplChn8qZ1w9PshYTZLNgjGq/PHSVvR/2rcM O57OFniH7nrYRlICGd0NVA6W5DhjYp64khnPRIa6R6cbSmDhxqIMRogapKsUKkCUDkiJ fdPk5MpBMu08eLYV8YQXXM9lGrrQtdOMJ2uJWqKvf09ZJGAXnmqYHU+F0etpIiP4z+S6 bamaxwf8v1rS5d0bMl1XAFwTT2XYgF2jAOds5dlvCaTsVcA4ii8aLMABvoGkI19Cupsw r1UoqBzsTaoLPH+Wx1mjkP3+YbDbqyJ5Tbkc5AXd3NOCGs/AEp2zSwxlpUXYsPff2OY7 6VeA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id u28si25979944pfl.138.2019.05.28.08.13.56; Tue, 28 May 2019 08:14:11 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727854AbfE1PNc (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 28 May 2019 11:13:32 -0400 Received: from fieldses.org ([173.255.197.46]:38270 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726826AbfE1PNc (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 May 2019 11:13:32 -0400 Received: by fieldses.org (Postfix, from userid 2815) id 465721C21; Tue, 28 May 2019 11:13:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 11:13:31 -0400 From: "J. Bruce Fields" To: Benjamin Coddington Cc: YueHaibing , jlayton@kernel.org, trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com, anna.schumaker@netapp.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] lockd: Make two symbols static Message-ID: <20190528151331.GA29554@fieldses.org> References: <20190528090652.13288-1-yuehaibing@huawei.com> <97D052EC-1F07-4210-81CC-7E0085C095BD@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <97D052EC-1F07-4210-81CC-7E0085C095BD@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 06:49:13AM -0400, Benjamin Coddington wrote: > Maintainers, what's the best thing to do here: fold these into > another patch version and post it (add attribution)? Add it as > another patch at the end of the series? Either would be fine. Yeah, if it was folded in then we'd add a line like [hulkci@huawei.com: make symbols static to fix sparse warnings] But I'll probably just add it on to the end for now. No need for you to do anything. > I have learned my lesson: add sparse to my workflow. I dunno, I wonder if we're better off just leaving it to this CI bot. It seems like a more efficient use of time overall than making every contributor run it. --b. > Ben > > On 28 May 2019, at 5:06, YueHaibing wrote: > > >Fix sparse warnings: > > > >fs/lockd/clntproc.c:57:6: warning: symbol 'nlmclnt_put_lockowner' > >was not declared. Should it be static? > >fs/lockd/svclock.c:409:35: warning: symbol 'nlmsvc_lock_ops' was > >not declared. Should it be static? > > > >Reported-by: Hulk Robot > >Signed-off-by: YueHaibing > >--- > > fs/lockd/clntproc.c | 2 +- > > fs/lockd/svclock.c | 2 +- > > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > >diff --git a/fs/lockd/clntproc.c b/fs/lockd/clntproc.c > >index 0ff8ad4..b11f2af 100644 > >--- a/fs/lockd/clntproc.c > >+++ b/fs/lockd/clntproc.c > >@@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ nlmclnt_get_lockowner(struct nlm_lockowner > >*lockowner) > > return lockowner; > > } > > > >-void nlmclnt_put_lockowner(struct nlm_lockowner *lockowner) > >+static void nlmclnt_put_lockowner(struct nlm_lockowner *lockowner) > > { > > if (!refcount_dec_and_lock(&lockowner->count, > >&lockowner->host->h_lock)) > > return; > >diff --git a/fs/lockd/svclock.c b/fs/lockd/svclock.c > >index 5f9f19b..61d3cc2 100644 > >--- a/fs/lockd/svclock.c > >+++ b/fs/lockd/svclock.c > >@@ -406,7 +406,7 @@ static void > >nlmsvc_locks_release_private(struct file_lock *fl) > > nlmsvc_put_lockowner((struct nlm_lockowner *)fl->fl_owner); > > } > > > >-const struct file_lock_operations nlmsvc_lock_ops = { > >+static const struct file_lock_operations nlmsvc_lock_ops = { > > .fl_copy_lock = nlmsvc_locks_copy_lock, > > .fl_release_private = nlmsvc_locks_release_private, > > }; > >-- > >2.7.4