From: Ladislav Michl <ladis@linux-mips.org>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>
Cc: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com>,
knaack.h@gmx.de, lars@metafoo.de, pmeerw@pmeerw.net,
denis.ciocca@st.com, rfontana@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de,
heiko.stuebner@bq.com, rjones@gateworks.com, drake@endlessm.com,
colin.king@canonical.com, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] iio: st_accel: Fix unused variable warning
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2019 21:15:35 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191102201535.GA30346@lenoch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191102140810.3d756294@archlinux>
On Sat, Nov 02, 2019 at 02:08:10PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 11:41:25 +0100
> Ladislav Michl <ladis@linux-mips.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 09:47:41PM +0800, YueHaibing wrote:
> > > drivers/iio/accel/st_accel_core.c:1005:44: warning:
> > > mount_matrix_ext_info defined but not used [-Wunused-const-variable=]
> > >
> > > Move it to ifdef to mute this warning.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/iio/accel/st_accel_core.c | 2 ++
> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/iio/accel/st_accel_core.c b/drivers/iio/accel/st_accel_core.c
> > > index 2e37f8a..bba0717 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/iio/accel/st_accel_core.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/iio/accel/st_accel_core.c
> > > @@ -1002,10 +1002,12 @@ get_mount_matrix(const struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> > > return adata->mount_matrix;
> > > }
> > >
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> > > static const struct iio_chan_spec_ext_info mount_matrix_ext_info[] = {
> > > IIO_MOUNT_MATRIX(IIO_SHARED_BY_ALL, get_mount_matrix),
> >
> > So now you do not get any warning for unused get_mount_matrix?
> > (Then it would make more sense to put all that stuff under one ifdef
> > and provide empty apply_acpi_orientation for non ACPI case)
>
> Does the __maybe_unused marking make this go away?
>
> I'd assume that the compiler will manage to drop this either way
> but I guess we should check that.
>
> ifdef magic is always harder to read and potentially fragile in the
> long run. Here we simply want to indicate that in some build
> configurations we might not use this.
This suggestion implies we'll get rid of CONFIG_ACPI completely, which
seems inapproriate looking at size of apply_acpi_orientation function.
And having both CONFIG_ACPI and __maybe_unused does not make much
sense. I had something like that in mind (+COMPILE_TEST perhaps):
diff --git a/drivers/iio/accel/st_accel_core.c b/drivers/iio/accel/st_accel_core.c
index 2e37f8a6d8cf..0e7eac62d618 100644
--- a/drivers/iio/accel/st_accel_core.c
+++ b/drivers/iio/accel/st_accel_core.c
@@ -993,6 +993,7 @@ static const struct iio_trigger_ops st_accel_trigger_ops = {
#define ST_ACCEL_TRIGGER_OPS NULL
#endif
+#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
static const struct iio_mount_matrix *
get_mount_matrix(const struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
const struct iio_chan_spec *chan)
@@ -1013,7 +1014,6 @@ static const struct iio_chan_spec_ext_info mount_matrix_ext_info[] = {
static int apply_acpi_orientation(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
struct iio_chan_spec *channels)
{
-#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
struct st_sensor_data *adata = iio_priv(indio_dev);
struct acpi_buffer buffer = {ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL};
struct acpi_device *adev;
@@ -1141,10 +1141,14 @@ static int apply_acpi_orientation(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
out:
kfree(buffer.pointer);
return ret;
-#else /* !CONFIG_ACPI */
+}
+#else
+static int apply_acpi_orientation(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
+ struct iio_chan_spec *channels)
+{
return 0;
-#endif
}
+#endif
/*
* st_accel_get_settings() - get sensor settings from device name
> Thanks,
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> >
> > > { },
> > > };
> > > +#endif
> > >
> > > /* Read ST-specific _ONT orientation data from ACPI and generate an
> > > * appropriate mount matrix.
> > > --
> > > 2.7.4
> > >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-02 20:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-01 13:47 [PATCH -next] iio: st_accel: Fix unused variable warning YueHaibing
2019-11-02 10:41 ` Ladislav Michl
2019-11-02 14:08 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-11-02 20:15 ` Ladislav Michl [this message]
2019-11-03 11:01 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-11-04 1:29 ` Yuehaibing
2019-11-09 11:50 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-11-11 3:21 ` [PATCH v2 " YueHaibing
2019-11-16 14:58 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-11-18 1:41 ` Yuehaibing
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191102201535.GA30346@lenoch \
--to=ladis@linux-mips.org \
--cc=colin.king@canonical.com \
--cc=denis.ciocca@st.com \
--cc=drake@endlessm.com \
--cc=heiko.stuebner@bq.com \
--cc=jic23@kernel.org \
--cc=knaack.h@gmx.de \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
--cc=rfontana@redhat.com \
--cc=rjones@gateworks.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=yuehaibing@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).