From: Josh Triplett <j...@joshtriplett.org> Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2013 19:41:49 -0800
> 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? Then create a Space.h for this. Otherwise if something accidently makes the function signatures not match at the call site vs. the definition, or vice versa, nothing will catch it.
