Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 85571
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 10, 20262026-05-10T22:06:37+00:00 2026-05-10T22:06:37+00:00

Is there a reason why most function definition in device driver in linux code

  • 0

Is there a reason why most function definition in device driver in linux code is defined as static? Is there a reason for this?

I was told this is for scoping and to prevent namespace pollution, could anyone explain it in detail why static definition is used in this context?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. 2026-05-10T22:06:38+00:00Added an answer on May 10, 2026 at 10:06 pm

    Functions declared static are not visible outside the translation unit they are defined in (a translation unit is basically a .c file). If a function does not need to be called from outside the file, then it should be made static so as to not pollute the global namespace. This makes conflicts between names that are the same are less likely to happen. Exported symbols are usually indentified with some sort of subsystem tag, which further reduces scope for conflict.

    Often, pointers to these functions end up in structs, so they are actually called from outside the file they are defined in, but not by their function name.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Ask A Question

Stats

  • Questions 63k
  • Answers 63k
  • Best Answers 0
  • User 1
  • Popular
  • Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to approach applying for a job at a company ...

    • 7 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to handle personal stress caused by utterly incompetent and ...

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    What is a programmer’s life like?

    • 5 Answers
  • added an answer It's not possible per the Rss Spec, and if you… May 11, 2026 at 10:28 am
  • added an answer I believe the 'proper' way is to make them inline… May 11, 2026 at 10:28 am
  • added an answer You've added 6 months to datePast, not dateFuture. Here's the… May 11, 2026 at 10:28 am

Related Questions

Is there a reason why most function definition in device driver in linux code
For some reason I never see this done. Is there a reason why not?
Is there a good reason why there is no Pair<L,R> in Java? What would
Is there a specific reason why I should be using the Html.CheckBox , Html.TextBox
Is there a particular reason why a generic ICloneable<T> does not exist? It would
Is there a specific reason that the EF requires new data providers and can't
Put differently: Is there a good reason to choose a loosely-typed collection over a
After moving to .NET 2.0+ is there ever a reason to still use the
With generics, is there ever a reason to create specific derived EventArg classes It
According to the documentation, they're pretty much interchangeable. Is there a stylistic reason to

Trending Tags

analytics british company computer developers django employee employer english facebook french google interview javascript language life php programmer programs salary

Top Members

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.