From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC4B5C433F5 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 02:41:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233703AbiBOClo (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Feb 2022 21:41:44 -0500 Received: from mxb-00190b01.gslb.pphosted.com ([23.128.96.19]:45440 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232692AbiBOCln (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Feb 2022 21:41:43 -0500 Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37AA119C14; Mon, 14 Feb 2022 18:41:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1644892891; x=1676428891; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=zWXnrgqBKLup/OQfdGAvpbfBybF/qzrEr723T6dByos=; b=f8ObIKR+S1BQIdAD3u0Agu0X0Bb2SOQOjxbwNvsAUJSGmdHeLxx/xqWA cBndyavAj3lSu2BtdlC/HZRhfYKc6QhmXi4r/XPs1CDU0CRE8Io4nDWoY RSFW0Al3MKs8XbG+ajLBK7rIpIHDqJ3cTxMkQMiIM1nIEMFWqySDp3twF u51xcVNWR3oBdl6P2a9ZONda3y+gCRA03TilMTRJzep4YWecs3uGaV3X1 B+TsXZ3XGrRLNKouUgC6H+kevrsV3dTlxaxZFqYRQhDseT9A+2l+HrmS7 +z7d07z4KX+vAzZgy3xb8nxp/Upvv7Q/uNs9vYH+ZAADHTD3UkMsqZBHz Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10258"; a="237642807" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,369,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="237642807" Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Feb 2022 18:41:30 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,369,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="635571634" Received: from lkp-server01.sh.intel.com (HELO d95dc2dabeb1) ([10.239.97.150]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 14 Feb 2022 18:41:29 -0800 Received: from kbuild by d95dc2dabeb1 with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nJnmS-0009Br-MW; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 02:41:28 +0000 Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2022 10:40:46 +0800 From: kernel test robot To: Stefan Roesch , io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com Cc: kbuild-all@lists.01.org, shr@fb.com Subject: [RFC PATCH] fs: __alloc_page_buffers() can be static Message-ID: <20220215024046.GA23599@ac25a70e2135> References: <20220214174403.4147994-6-shr@fb.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220214174403.4147994-6-shr@fb.com> X-Patchwork-Hint: ignore User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org fs/buffer.c:805:20: warning: symbol '__alloc_page_buffers' was not declared. Should it be static? Reported-by: kernel test robot Signed-off-by: kernel test robot --- fs/buffer.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/fs/buffer.c b/fs/buffer.c index a1986f95a39a0..19a4ab1f61686 100644 --- a/fs/buffer.c +++ b/fs/buffer.c @@ -802,7 +802,7 @@ int remove_inode_buffers(struct inode *inode) return ret; } -struct buffer_head *__alloc_page_buffers(struct page *page, unsigned long size, +static struct buffer_head *__alloc_page_buffers(struct page *page, unsigned long size, gfp_t gfp) { struct buffer_head *bh, *head;