Re: [PATCH v2 5/9] drivers: net: Put prototype declaration forfunction sbni_probe() in sbni.c

[Josh Triplett]

On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 10:26:58PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Rashika Kheria <rashika.kheria@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2013 17:55:42 +0530
> 
> > This patch declares the prototype for the function sbni_probe() in file sbni.c.
> > 
> > Thus, it also removes the following warning in wan/sbni.c:
> > drivers/net/wan/sbni.c:224:12: warning: no previous prototype for âsbni_probeâ [-Wmissing-prototypes]
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Rashika Kheria <rashika.kheria@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > 
> > This revision fixes the following issues of the previous revision:
> > Incorrect fix
> > 
> >  drivers/net/wan/sbni.c |    1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wan/sbni.c b/drivers/net/wan/sbni.c
> > index 388ddf6..5061ffd 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/wan/sbni.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wan/sbni.c
> > @@ -221,6 +221,7 @@ static void __init sbni_devsetup(struct net_device *dev)
> >  	dev->netdev_ops = &sbni_netdev_ops;
> >  }
> >  
> > +int __init sbni_probe(int unit);
> >  int __init sbni_probe(int unit)
> 
> This is not the correct way to fix this kind of warning, an exported
> function needs to appear in a header file so that both the definition
> and any callers of this function will see the same declaration in that
> header file.

It should, yes; however, in this case, the function is one of several
dozen that are directly prototyped and used by drivers/net/Space.c, and
there's no header file prototyping any of those functions.

Do you have a suggestion for what header file should contain a prototype
for this probe function?

- Josh Triplett
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/