RE: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: Fix compile warning in amdgpu_fru_read_eeprom

["Russell, Kent" <Kent.Russell@amd.com>]

[AMD Public Use]

Thanks for making me look at it critically (something I should do more after returning from 2 weeks vacation). Nirmoy fixed the issue by using a static define in his " drm/amdgpu: label internally used symbols as static" patch and I was just in autopilot trying to fix the Intel kbot error email that I received while away, not actually realizing that it was fixed and I was breaking and unbreaking it during rebasing. This thread can be ignored. Time for some coffee.

 Kent

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Koenig, Christian <Christian.Koenig@amd.com>
> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2020 8:29 AM
> To: Russell, Kent <Kent.Russell@amd.com>; amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: Fix compile warning in
> amdgpu_fru_read_eeprom
> 
> Ok, then why does it fix a warning if we make it non-static?
> 
> If the function used it compiled under some #ifdef then we should probably
> just compile this under #ifdef as well.
> 
> Christian.
> 
> Am 29.06.20 um 14:20 schrieb Russell, Kent:
> > [AMD Public Use]
> >
> > It's used repeatedly in the amdgpu_fru_get_product_info function, but only
> in that function which is in the amdgpu_fru_eeprom.c file. While it could be
> theoretically be used elsewhere, it isn't currently and any other usage would
> be best contained in the amdgpu_fru_eeprom.c file.
> >
> >   Kent
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Christian König <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@gmail.com>
> >> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2020 8:17 AM
> >> To: Russell, Kent <Kent.Russell@amd.com>;
> >> amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: Fix compile warning in
> >> amdgpu_fru_read_eeprom
> >>
> >> Am 29.06.20 um 14:13 schrieb Kent Russell:
> >>> This fixes the missing-prototypes warning for the
> >>> amdgpu_fru_read_eeprom function. Since we declare it in the header,
> >>> we can make it un-static
> >> Well is it used in different files? Otherwise we might just have
> >> unused code in the module which can potentially raise a warning as well.
> >>
> >> Christian.
> >>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Kent Russell <kent.russell@amd.com>
> >>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> >>> Change-Id: I2b9419365cb8b38bcfb6582df53b96c83861d6cf
> >>> ---
> >>>    drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_fru_eeprom.c | 2 +-
> >>>    drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_fru_eeprom.h | 2 ++
> >>>    2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_fru_eeprom.c
> >>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_fru_eeprom.c
> >>> index e811fecc540f..68ed16e4d8be 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_fru_eeprom.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_fru_eeprom.c
> >>> @@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ static bool is_fru_eeprom_supported(struct
> >> amdgpu_device *adev)
> >>>    	return false;
> >>>    }
> >>>
> >>> -static int amdgpu_fru_read_eeprom(struct amdgpu_device *adev,
> >>> uint32_t addrptr,
> >>> +int amdgpu_fru_read_eeprom(struct amdgpu_device *adev, uint32_t
> >>> +addrptr,
> >>>    			   unsigned char *buff)
> >>>    {
> >>>    	int ret, size;
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_fru_eeprom.h
> >>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_fru_eeprom.h
> >>> index f29a8611d69b..f4024f1d66c9 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_fru_eeprom.h
> >>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_fru_eeprom.h
> >>> @@ -24,6 +24,8 @@
> >>>    #ifndef __AMDGPU_FRU_EEPROM_H__
> >>>    #define __AMDGPU_FRU_EEPROM_H__
> >>>
> >>> +int amdgpu_fru_read_eeprom(struct amdgpu_device *adev, uint32_t
> >> addrptr,
> >>> +                           unsigned char *buff);
> >>>    int amdgpu_fru_get_product_info(struct amdgpu_device *adev);
> >>>
> >>>    #endif  // __AMDGPU_PRODINFO_H__
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx