Re: [PATCH] ixgbe: fix sparse warnings

[Jeff Kirsher]

On Thu, 2015-02-05 at 14:27 +0000, Lad Prabhakar wrote:
> From: "Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> this patch fixes following sparse warnings:
> 
> ixgbe_x550.c:83:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_init_eeprom_params_X550' was
> not declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:113:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_read_iosf_sb_reg_x550' was
> not declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:161:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_read_ee_hostif_data_X550'
> was not declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:196:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_read_ee_hostif_buffer_X550'
> was not declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:334:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_calc_checksum_X550' was not
> declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:410:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_calc_eeprom_checksum_X550'
> was not declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:422:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_read_ee_hostif_X550' was
> not declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:443:5: warning: symbol
> 'ixgbe_validate_eeprom_checksum_X550' was not declared. Should it be
> static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:492:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_write_ee_hostif_data_X550'
> was not declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:520:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_write_ee_hostif_X550' was
> not declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:540:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_update_flash_X550' was not
> declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:563:5: warning: symbol
> 'ixgbe_update_eeprom_checksum_X550' was not declared. Should it be
> static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:603:5: warning: symbol
> 'ixgbe_write_ee_hostif_buffer_X550' was not declared. Should it be
> static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:633:6: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_init_mac_link_ops_X550em'
> was not declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:650:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_setup_sfp_modules_X550em'
> was not declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:706:5: warning: symbol
> 'ixgbe_get_link_capabilities_X550em' was not declared. Should it be
> static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:743:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_write_iosf_sb_reg_x550' was
> not declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:907:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_setup_kx4_x550em' was not
> declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:945:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_setup_kr_x550em' was not
> declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:990:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_setup_internal_phy_x550em'
> was not declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:1052:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_init_phy_ops_X550em' was
> not declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:1105:23: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_get_media_type_X550em'
> was not declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:1132:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_init_ext_t_x550em' was not
> declared. Should it be static?
> ixgbe_x550.c:1205:5: warning: symbol 'ixgbe_reset_hw_X550em' was not
> declared. Should it be static?
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lad, Prabhakar <prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  Found this issue on linux-next (gcc  version 4.9.2,
>  sparse version  0.4.5-rc1)and applies on top linux-next.
> 
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_x550.c | 64
> ++++++++++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)

Don Skidmore already has a patch to resolve these warnings in my queue.
So I will be dropping this patch.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part