Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] ixgbe: fix sparse warnings | From | Jeff Kirsher <> | Date | Thu, 05 Feb 2015 17:30:44 -0800 |
| |
On Thu, 2015-02-05 at 14:27 +0000, Lad Prabhakar wrote: > From: "Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com> > > this patch fixes following sparse warnings: > > ixgbe_x550.c:83:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_init_eeprom_params_X550' was > not declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:113:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_read_iosf_sb_reg_x550' was > not declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:161:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_read_ee_hostif_data_X550' > was not declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:196:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_read_ee_hostif_buffer_X550' > was not declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:334:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_calc_checksum_X550' was not > declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:410:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_calc_eeprom_checksum_X550' > was not declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:422:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_read_ee_hostif_X550' was > not declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:443:5: warning: symbol > 'ixgbe_validate_eeprom_checksum_X550' was not declared. Should it be > static? > ixgbe_x550.c:492:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_write_ee_hostif_data_X550' > was not declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:520:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_write_ee_hostif_X550' was > not declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:540:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_update_flash_X550' was not > declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:563:5: warning: symbol > 'ixgbe_update_eeprom_checksum_X550' was not declared. Should it be > static? > ixgbe_x550.c:603:5: warning: symbol > 'ixgbe_write_ee_hostif_buffer_X550' was not declared. Should it be > static? > ixgbe_x550.c:633:6: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_init_mac_link_ops_X550em' > was not declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:650:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_setup_sfp_modules_X550em' > was not declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:706:5: warning: symbol > 'ixgbe_get_link_capabilities_X550em' was not declared. Should it be > static? > ixgbe_x550.c:743:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_write_iosf_sb_reg_x550' was > not declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:907:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_setup_kx4_x550em' was not > declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:945:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_setup_kr_x550em' was not > declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:990:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_setup_internal_phy_x550em' > was not declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:1052:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_init_phy_ops_X550em' was > not declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:1105:23: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_get_media_type_X550em' > was not declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:1132:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_init_ext_t_x550em' was not > declared. Should it be static? > ixgbe_x550.c:1205:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_reset_hw_X550em' was not > declared. Should it be static? > > Signed-off-by: Lad, Prabhakar <prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com> > --- > Found this issue on linux-next (gcc version 4.9.2, > sparse version 0.4.5-rc1)and applies on top linux-next. > > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_x550.c | 64 > ++++++++++++++------------- > 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
Don Skidmore already has a patch to resolve these warnings in my queue. So I will be dropping this patch. [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |