drivers:staging: fix compilation warning
PATCH 1/1 drivers:staging: fix compilation warning
We do not allow old-style function definition. Always spell foo(void) if a function does not take any parameters.
--- drivers/staging/telephony/ixj.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
drivers/staging/telephony/ixj.c +1 -1
@@ -318,7 +318,7 @@ static IXJ *ixj[IXJMAX];* Allocate a free IXJ device */ -static IXJ *ixj_alloc () +static IXJ *ixj_alloc (void ) {for (cnt=0 ; cnt<IXJMAX ; cnt++) {
Signature · 1 line
1.7.4.5
Quoted 3 lines · Cong Ding
We do not allow old-style function definition. Always spell foo(void) if a function does not take any parameters.
You should be working against linux-next. This driver has been deleted in linux-next.
The subject should have been:
[PATCH] Staging: telephony/ixj: fix sparse warning
or something like that. "drivers" is not useful. And Staging by itself is too broad.
I think it's a Sparse warning, not a compile warning? Copy and paste the warning into the commit message.
Anyway, since this was deleted it doesn't matter.
regards,
dan carpenter
Quoted 8 lines · Dan Carpenter
Quoted 3 lines · Cong Ding
We do not allow old-style function definition. Always spell foo(void) if a function does not take any parameters.
You should be working against linux-next. This driver has been deleted in linux-next.
Quoted 7 lines
The subject should have been:
[PATCH] Staging: telephony/ixj: fix sparse warning
or something like that. "drivers" is not useful. And Staging by itself is too broad.I think it's a Sparse warning, not a compile warning? Copy and paste the warning into the commit message.
sure, thanks for the suggestions.
- cong
Quoted 6 lines
Anyway, since this was deleted it doesn't matter.
regards,
dan carpenter
Greg Kroah-Hartman
maintainerQuoted 7 lines · Cong Ding
We do not allow old-style function definition. Always spell foo(void) if a function does not take any parameters.
Signed-off-by Cong Ding <[email protected]>--- drivers/staging/telephony/ixj.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
As Dan pointed out, you have to work against linux-next, otherwise you waste time fixing things that might not even be in the tree anymore, like this code.
sorry,
greg k-h