On 21/06/2024 1:20 am, victorm.l...@amd.com wrote: > diff --git a/xen/common/sched/credit2.c b/xen/common/sched/credit2.c > index 685929c290..10a32bd160 100644 > --- a/xen/common/sched/credit2.c > +++ b/xen/common/sched/credit2.c > @@ -1476,7 +1476,7 @@ static inline void runq_remove(struct csched2_unit *svc) > list_del_init(&svc->runq_elem); > } > > -void burn_credits(struct csched2_runqueue_data *rqd, struct csched2_unit > *svc, > +static void burn_credits(struct csched2_runqueue_data *rqd, struct > csched2_unit *svc, > s_time_t now); > > static inline void > @@ -1855,7 +1855,7 @@ static void reset_credit(int cpu, s_time_t now, struct > csched2_unit *snext) > /* No need to resort runqueue, as everyone's order should be the same. */ > } > > -void burn_credits(struct csched2_runqueue_data *rqd, > +static void burn_credits(struct csched2_runqueue_data *rqd, > struct csched2_unit *svc, s_time_t now)
Thankyou for the patch. By and large it's fine, but for both of these examples, please re-indent the following line too, so the parameter list remains aligned in the eventual code. ~Andrew
