[PATCH] staging/sm75fb: Declare static functions as such

[PATCH] staging/sm75fb: Declare static functions as such

[Ricardo Ribalda Delgado]

This patch fixes this sparse warning

CHECK   drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c
drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c:223:6: warning: symbol
  'swI2CStart' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c:234:6: warning: symbol
  'swI2CStop' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c:252:6: warning: symbol
  'swI2CWriteByte' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c:320:15: warning: symbol
  'swI2CReadByte' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c:361:6: warning: symbol
  'swI2CInit_SM750LE' was not declared. Should it be static?

Signed-off-by: Ricardo Ribalda Delgado <ricardo.ribalda@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c | 14 ++++++--------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c
index 1249759..231ec85 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c
@@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ static void swI2CAck(void)
 /*
  *  This function sends the start command to the slave device
  */
-void swI2CStart(void)
+static void swI2CStart(void)
 {
     /* Start I2C */
     swI2CSDA(1);
@@ -231,7 +231,7 @@ void swI2CStart(void)
 /*
  *  This function sends the stop command to the slave device
  */
-void swI2CStop(void)
+static void swI2CStop(void)
 {
     /* Stop the I2C */
     swI2CSCL(1);
@@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ void swI2CStop(void)
  *       0   - Success
  *      -1   - Fail to write byte
  */
-long swI2CWriteByte(unsigned char data)
+static long swI2CWriteByte(unsigned char data)
 {
     unsigned char value = data;
     int i;
@@ -317,7 +317,7 @@ long swI2CWriteByte(unsigned char data)
  *  Return Value:
  *      One byte data read from the Slave device
  */
-unsigned char swI2CReadByte(unsigned char ack)
+static unsigned char swI2CReadByte(unsigned char ack)
 {
     int i;
     unsigned char data = 0;
@@ -358,10 +358,8 @@ unsigned char swI2CReadByte(unsigned char ack)
  *      -1   - Fail to initialize the i2c
  *       0   - Success
  */
-long swI2CInit_SM750LE(
-    unsigned char i2cClkGPIO,
-    unsigned char i2cDataGPIO
-)
+static long swI2CInit_SM750LE(unsigned char i2cClkGPIO,
+			      unsigned char i2cDataGPIO)
 {
     int i;
 
-- 
2.1.4

[PATCH] staging/sm75fb: Declare static functions as such

[Ricardo Ribalda Delgado]

This patch fixes this sparse warning

CHECK   drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c
drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c:223:6: warning: symbol
  'swI2CStart' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c:234:6: warning: symbol
  'swI2CStop' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c:252:6: warning: symbol
  'swI2CWriteByte' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c:320:15: warning: symbol
  'swI2CReadByte' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c:361:6: warning: symbol
  'swI2CInit_SM750LE' was not declared. Should it be static?

Signed-off-by: Ricardo Ribalda Delgado <ricardo.ribalda@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c | 14 ++++++--------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c
index 1249759..231ec85 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/sm750fb/ddk750_swi2c.c
@@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ static void swI2CAck(void)
 /*
  *  This function sends the start command to the slave device
  */
-void swI2CStart(void)
+static void swI2CStart(void)
 {
     /* Start I2C */
     swI2CSDA(1);
@@ -231,7 +231,7 @@ void swI2CStart(void)
 /*
  *  This function sends the stop command to the slave device
  */
-void swI2CStop(void)
+static void swI2CStop(void)
 {
     /* Stop the I2C */
     swI2CSCL(1);
@@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ void swI2CStop(void)
  *       0   - Success
  *      -1   - Fail to write byte
  */
-long swI2CWriteByte(unsigned char data)
+static long swI2CWriteByte(unsigned char data)
 {
     unsigned char value = data;
     int i;
@@ -317,7 +317,7 @@ long swI2CWriteByte(unsigned char data)
  *  Return Value:
  *      One byte data read from the Slave device
  */
-unsigned char swI2CReadByte(unsigned char ack)
+static unsigned char swI2CReadByte(unsigned char ack)
 {
     int i;
     unsigned char data = 0;
@@ -358,10 +358,8 @@ unsigned char swI2CReadByte(unsigned char ack)
  *      -1   - Fail to initialize the i2c
  *       0   - Success
  */
-long swI2CInit_SM750LE(
-    unsigned char i2cClkGPIO,
-    unsigned char i2cDataGPIO
-)
+static long swI2CInit_SM750LE(unsigned char i2cClkGPIO,
+			      unsigned char i2cDataGPIO)
 {
     int i;
 
-- 
2.1.4

Re: [PATCH] staging/sm75fb: Declare static functions as such

[Lorenzo Stoakes]

On 16 March 2015 at 10:51, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado
<ricardo.ribalda@gmail.com> wrote:
> This patch fixes this sparse warning

Hi Ricardo,

I currently have a patch series awaiting the final ok which includes
fixes for these warnings
(http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1503.1/02535.html),
apologies but assuming there isn't something hideously wrong with my
series I suspect they supersedes this patch :(

It's really easy to accidentally submit a patch that has already been
covered elsewhere; I, as a rather new kernel contributor, always find
I have to search quite a bit to be *sure* that it's not been covered
already.

Additionally, your subject line is 'staging/sm75fb: Declare static
functions as such' which ought to be 'staging: sm750fb: Declare static
functions as such' - there's a typo in the device name and I think the
convention is always to use colons in subject lines.

Best,

-- 
Lorenzo Stoakes
https:/ljs.io

Re: [PATCH] staging/sm75fb: Declare static functions as such

[Ricardo Ribalda Delgado]

Hello Lorenzo

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 8:03 PM, Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I currently have a patch series awaiting the final ok which includes
> fixes for these warnings
> (http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1503.1/02535.html),
> apologies but assuming there isn't something hideously wrong with my
> series I suspect they supersedes this patch :(

Sorry about that, I did pull from linux-next and I am crealy not
subscribed to the right mailing list.


>
> It's really easy to accidentally submit a patch that has already been
> covered elsewhere; I, as a rather new kernel contributor, always find
> I have to search quite a bit to be *sure* that it's not been covered
> already.

I miss something like the properly maintained patchwork on
linux-media. It works really well to see what is on the pipeline. I
honestly never thought that somebody will take a look to this driver
:)

>
> Additionally, your subject line is 'staging/sm75fb: Declare static
> functions as such' which ought to be 'staging: sm750fb: Declare static
> functions as such' - there's a typo in the device name and I think the
> convention is always to use colons in subject lines.

About the typo, you are right of course :)

Regarding the colon, there is no convention about that, every
subsystem has its own preference. I prefer / than :

I agree that is your patch that should be pulled, not this one. But I
think you should split your patch in one patch per file.

All that said

Nacked-by: Ricardo Ribalda Delgado <ricardo.ribalda@gmail.com>

>
> Best,

Thanks!

>
> --
> Lorenzo Stoakes
> https:/ljs.io



-- 
Ricardo Ribalda

Re: [PATCH] staging/sm75fb: Declare static functions as such

[Ricardo Ribalda Delgado]

Hello Lorenzo

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 8:03 PM, Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I currently have a patch series awaiting the final ok which includes
> fixes for these warnings
> (http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1503.1/02535.html),
> apologies but assuming there isn't something hideously wrong with my
> series I suspect they supersedes this patch :(

Sorry about that, I did pull from linux-next and I am crealy not
subscribed to the right mailing list.


>
> It's really easy to accidentally submit a patch that has already been
> covered elsewhere; I, as a rather new kernel contributor, always find
> I have to search quite a bit to be *sure* that it's not been covered
> already.

I miss something like the properly maintained patchwork on
linux-media. It works really well to see what is on the pipeline. I
honestly never thought that somebody will take a look to this driver
:)

>
> Additionally, your subject line is 'staging/sm75fb: Declare static
> functions as such' which ought to be 'staging: sm750fb: Declare static
> functions as such' - there's a typo in the device name and I think the
> convention is always to use colons in subject lines.

About the typo, you are right of course :)

Regarding the colon, there is no convention about that, every
subsystem has its own preference. I prefer / than :

I agree that is your patch that should be pulled, not this one. But I
think you should split your patch in one patch per file.

All that said

Nacked-by: Ricardo Ribalda Delgado <ricardo.ribalda@gmail.com>

>
> Best,

Thanks!

>
> --
> Lorenzo Stoakes
> https:/ljs.io



-- 
Ricardo Ribalda