Re: [PATCH] STAGING: cxt1e1: Remove sparse warnings and resolve checkpatch issues

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

 



On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 11:23:38PM -0500, Michael Welling wrote:
> This patch resolves the following sparse warnings:
> 
>   CHECK   drivers/staging/cxt1e1/pmc93x6_eeprom.c
> drivers/staging/cxt1e1/pmc93x6_eeprom.c:158:1: warning: symbol 'eeprom_put_byte' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/staging/cxt1e1/pmc93x6_eeprom.c:183:1: warning: symbol 'eeprom_get_byte' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/staging/cxt1e1/pmc93x6_eeprom.c:256:1: warning: symbol 'pmc_eeprom_read' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/staging/cxt1e1/pmc93x6_eeprom.c:296:1: warning: symbol 'pmc_eeprom_write' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/staging/cxt1e1/pmc93x6_eeprom.c:364:1: warning: symbol 'pmcGetBuffValue' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/staging/cxt1e1/pmc93x6_eeprom.c:385:1: warning: symbol 'pmcSetBuffValue' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/staging/cxt1e1/pmc93x6_eeprom.c:403:1: warning: symbol 'pmc_eeprom_read_buffer' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/staging/cxt1e1/pmc93x6_eeprom.c:416:1: warning: symbol 'pmc_eeprom_write_buffer' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/staging/cxt1e1/pmc93x6_eeprom.c:433:1: warning: symbol 'pmcCalcCrc_T01' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/staging/cxt1e1/pmc93x6_eeprom.c:452:1: warning: symbol 'pmcCalcCrc_T02' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/staging/cxt1e1/pmc93x6_eeprom.c:489:1: warning: symbol 'pmc_init_seeprom' was not declared. Should it be static?
> drivers/staging/cxt1e1/pmc93x6_eeprom.c:521:1: warning: symbol 'pmc_verify_cksum' was not declared. Should it be static?
> 
> Also incorporates many indentation and coding style fixes as well as
> the removal of a volatile variable.

Please only do one thing at a time in a patch.  This should be multiple
patches, one for the static stuff, and one for volatile, and some for
the coding style issues.

Can you break this up into smaller patches and resend as a patch series?

thanks,

greg k-h
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [DMA Engine]     [Linux GPIO]     [Linux SPI]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Coverity]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite Backpacking]
  Powered by Linux