Re: [v5 07/12] libata: Make ata_scsi_durable_name static

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, 2020-09-26 at 09:17 -0500, Tony Asleson wrote:
> On 9/26/20 3:40 AM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> > Hello!
> > 
> > On 25.09.2020 19:19, Tony Asleson wrote:
> > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Tony Asleson <tasleson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >   drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c | 2 +-
> > >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c b/drivers/ata/libata-
> > > scsi.c
> > > index 194dac7dbdca..13a58ed7184c 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/ata/libata-scsi.c
> > > @@ -1086,7 +1086,7 @@ int ata_scsi_dev_config(struct scsi_device
> > > *sdev, struct ata_device *dev)
> > >       return 0;
> > >   }
> > >   -int ata_scsi_durable_name(const struct device *dev, char *buf,
> > > size_t len)
> > > +static int ata_scsi_durable_name(const struct device *dev, char
> > > *buf,
> > > size_t len)
> > 
> >    Why not do it in patch #6 -- when introducing the function?
> 
> This issue was found by the intel kernel test robot in v4 patch
> series. I thought it was better to have a separate commit with the
> correction that matched it's signed off.  Maybe that's not the
> correct approach?

No ... while a patch is being reviewed the purpose of review is to make
it better by folding in all the comments.  It then gets a changelog put
below the 

---

v5: made X function static

So people can follow how it has evolved.  This is all actually
described in Documentation/submitting-patches.

James





[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [IDE]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux