On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 10:26:58PM -0500, David Miller wrote: > From: Rashika Kheria <rashika.khe...@gmail.com> > 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 > > ‘sbni_probe’ [-Wmissing-prototypes] > > > > Signed-off-by: Rashika Kheria <rashika.khe...@gmail.com> > > --- > > > > 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 majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
