On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Stefan Ringel <stefan.ringel@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> signed-off-by: Stefan Ringel <stefan.ringel@xxxxxxxx>
>
> --- a/drivers/staging/tm6000/tm6000-cards.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/tm6000/tm6000-cards.c
> @@ -221,12 +239,13 @@ struct usb_device_id tm6000_id_table [] = {
> { USB_DEVICE(0x2040, 0x6600), .driver_info =
> TM6010_BOARD_HAUPPAUGE_900H },
> { USB_DEVICE(0x6000, 0xdec0), .driver_info =
> TM6010_BOARD_BEHOLD_WANDER },
> { USB_DEVICE(0x6000, 0xdec1), .driver_info =
> TM6010_BOARD_BEHOLD_VOYAGER },
> { USB_DEVICE(0x0ccd, 0x0086), .driver_info =
> TM6010_BOARD_TERRATEC_CINERGY_HYBRID_XE },
> { },
> };
>
> /* Tuner callback to provide the proper gpio changes needed for xc2028 */
>
> -static int tm6000_tuner_callback(void *ptr, int component, int command,
> int arg)
> +int tm6000_tuner_callback(void *ptr, int component, int command, int arg)
> {
Why was the static removed from this declaration? What could possibly
be calling this from outside the module? And if there were something
that needed it, the declaration would have to be moved to a header
file so it could be included elsewhere (which should be in this same
patch).
Just to be clear, the fact that I am going through these patches
should not be taken personally - I'm just trying to give you some
advice on what you need to do to ensure the patches can be accepted
upstream and be reviewed with minimal cost to the other developers.
Devin
--
Devin J. Heitmueller - Kernel Labs
http://www.kernellabs.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
