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?
