Rule 17.3 when function has definition

[dunno]

I wonder if the code below violates rule 17.3:

void dostuff(int x) {
    // do some stuff..
}

void func(void) {
    dostuff(12);   // <- is 17.3 violated here?
}

Please note that the functions dostuff and func violates rule 8.4 and don't have prototypes.

Question: is 17.3 violated when calling a function that violates rule 8.4?

The rationale for 17.3 also does not apply to my example code as far as I understand:

    If a function is declared implicitly, a C90 compiler will assume
    that the function has a return type of int. Since an implicit 
    function declaration does not provide a prototype, a compiler will
    have no information about the number of function parameters and
    their types.