On Sat, Jan 09, 2021, Souptick Joarder wrote:
> Kernel test robot throws below warning ->
>
> >> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c:7979:5: warning: no previous prototype for
> >> '__kvm_vcpu_halt' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
> 7979 | int __kvm_vcpu_halt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int state, int
> reason)
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Marking __kvm_vcpu_halt() as static as it is used inside this file.
Paolo beat you to the punch, commit 872f36eb0b0f ("KVM: x86: __kvm_vcpu_halt
can be static").
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Souptick Joarder <jrdr.linux@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> index 61499e1..c2fdf14 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -109,6 +109,7 @@
> static void __kvm_set_rflags(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long rflags);
> static void store_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> static int sync_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> +static int __kvm_vcpu_halt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int state, int reason);
FWIW, this forward declaration is unnecessary.
> struct kvm_x86_ops kvm_x86_ops __read_mostly;
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_x86_ops);
> @@ -7976,7 +7977,7 @@ void kvm_arch_exit(void)
> kmem_cache_destroy(x86_fpu_cache);
> }
>
> -int __kvm_vcpu_halt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int state, int reason)
> +static int __kvm_vcpu_halt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int state, int reason)
> {
> ++vcpu->stat.halt_exits;
> if (lapic_in_kernel(vcpu)) {
> --
> 1.9.1
>
