On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 11:40:59PM +0000, Krzysztof Wilczyński wrote:
> At the moment, the function pci_numachip_init() is defined in the
> numachip.c file. Since this function has users outside of this file,
> add missing foward declaration to the pci_x86.h file.
>
> This resolves the following sparse and compile time warning:
>
> arch/x86/pci/numachip.c:108:12: warning: no previous prototype for function 'pci_numachip_init' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
> arch/x86/pci/numachip.c:108:12: warning: symbol 'pci_numachip_init' was not declared. Should it be static?
Thanks for worrying about warnings like this. They're small but
important.
What should be done with the pci_numachip_init() declaration in
arch/x86/include/asm/numachip/numachip.h? It doesn't seem like we
should have *two* declarations.
The one in arch/x86/include/asm/numachip/numachip.h is:
extern int __init pci_numachip_init(void);
I'm not enough of a C language lawyer to know whether "__init" in a
declaration is useful. It doesn't *seem* like it would be useful
since this is not a definition and the compiler isn't generating code
here. But "git grep __init include/ arch/*/include" finds quite a few
of them.
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Wilczyński <kw@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/pci_x86.h | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/pci_x86.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/pci_x86.h
> index 490411dba438..906f40cae3fc 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/pci_x86.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/pci_x86.h
> @@ -50,6 +50,10 @@ enum pci_bf_sort_state {
> pci_dmi_bf,
> };
>
> +/* numachip.c */
> +
> +int pci_numachip_init(void);
> +
> /* pci-i386.c */
>
> void pcibios_resource_survey(void);
> --
> 2.32.0
>
