[PATCH] net: dsa: ocelot: fix "should it be static?" warnings

[PATCH] net: dsa: ocelot: fix "should it be static?" warnings

[Chen Wandun]

Fix following sparse warnings:
drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix.c:351:6: warning: symbol 'felix_txtstamp' was not declared. Should it be static?

Signed-off-by: Chen Wandun <chenwandun@huawei.com>
---
 drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix.c b/drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix.c
index 167e415..b7f9246 100644
--- a/drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix.c
+++ b/drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix.c
@@ -348,8 +348,8 @@ static bool felix_rxtstamp(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port,
 	return false;
 }
 
-bool felix_txtstamp(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port,
-		    struct sk_buff *clone, unsigned int type)
+static bool felix_txtstamp(struct dsa_switch *ds, int port,
+			   struct sk_buff *clone, unsigned int type)
 {
 	struct ocelot *ocelot = ds->priv;
 	struct ocelot_port *ocelot_port = ocelot->ports[port];
-- 
2.7.4

Re: [PATCH] net: dsa: ocelot: fix "should it be static?" warnings

[Vivien Didelot]

On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 20:32:45 +0800, Chen Wandun <chenwandun@huawei.com> wrote:
> Fix following sparse warnings:
> drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix.c:351:6: warning: symbol 'felix_txtstamp' was not declared. Should it be static?
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chen Wandun <chenwandun@huawei.com>

Reviewed-by: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>

Re: [PATCH] net: dsa: ocelot: fix "should it be static?" warnings

[David Miller]

From: Chen Wandun <chenwandun@huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 20:32:45 +0800

> Fix following sparse warnings:
> drivers/net/dsa/ocelot/felix.c:351:6: warning: symbol 'felix_txtstamp' was not declared. Should it be static?
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chen Wandun <chenwandun@huawei.com>

Next time please indicate _explicitly_ which tree your patch is targetting,
because especially in this case the change is only relevant for "net-next"

Also, please provide a proper Fixes: tag.