On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 6:44 AM Pavel Skripkin wrote: > > On 8/25/21 4:34 PM, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 04:02:26PM +0300, Pavel Skripkin wrote: > >> > This is not related to your patch. Ignore it. > >> > > >> > > >> > > > vim +2022 drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/usb_halinit.c > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > 2020 case HW_VAR_BCN_VALID: > >> > > > 2021 /* BCN_VALID, BIT(16) of REG_TDECTRL = BIT(0) of REG_TDECTRL+2, write 1 to clear, Clear by sw */ > >> > > > > 2022 u8 tmp; > >> > > > >> > > Hm, I don't know anything about ARM compilers, so should I wrap this code > >> > > block with {}? > >> > > >> > Yep. > >> > > >> > > > >> > > My local gcc 11.1.1 (x86_64) does not produce any warnings/errors > >> > > > >> > > >> > You should figure out whats up with that because it shouldn't compile > >> > with the gcc options that the kernel uses. > >> > > >> > >> AFAIK, at least 2 guys except me in this CC list compiled my series without > >> errors/warnings. Maybe, staging tree is missing some Makefile updates? > >> > >> > >> I'll resend series this evening anyway, but this is strange.... > > > > Hm... In my version of GCC the error is: > > > > drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/usb_halinit.c:1870:3: error: a label can only be part of a statement and a declaration is not a statement > > > > That's a different error from what I was expecting. It's caused by > > having a declaration directly after a case statement. The warning that > > I was expecting was from -Wdeclaration-after-statement and it looks > > like this: > > > > warning: ISO C90 forbids mixed declarations and code [-Wdeclaration-after-statement] > > > > You really should try investigate why this compiles for you because > > something is going wrong. It should not build without a warning. > > > > Looks like it's bug in gcc 11.1.1. I've rebuilt this module with gcc 10 > (gcc-10 (SUSE Linux) 10.3.1 20210707 [revision > 048117e16c77f82598fca9af585500572d46ad73]) and build fails with error > described above > > > My default gcc is > > gcc (SUSE Linux) 11.1.1 20210721 [revision > 076930b9690ac3564638636f6b13bbb6bc608aea] > > > Any idea? :) The original report said the build was with clang-14, which is near top of tree and unreleased. It's possible that that build had a bug that hopefully was reverted. -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers