Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1532717 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH] misc: sram: remove useless #ifdef

Started byGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
First post2016-11-29 20:50 +0100
Last post2016-11-30 00:40 +0100
Articles 4 — 2 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  Re: [PATCH] misc: sram: remove useless #ifdef Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2016-11-29 20:50 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] misc: sram: remove useless #ifdef Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com> - 2016-11-29 21:00 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] misc: sram: remove useless #ifdef Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> - 2016-11-29 21:10 +0100
        Re: [PATCH] misc: sram: remove useless #ifdef Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com> - 2016-11-30 00:40 +0100

#1532717 — Re: [PATCH] misc: sram: remove useless #ifdef

FromGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Date2016-11-29 20:50 +0100
SubjectRe: [PATCH] misc: sram: remove useless #ifdef
Message-ID<sIWzD-4hH-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 03:30:54PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> A recent patch added a new function that is now unused whenever
> CONFIG_OF is disabled:
> 
> drivers/misc/sram.c:342:12: error: 'atmel_securam_wait' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
> 
> There is actually no reason for the #ifdef, because the driver
> currently cannot be used in a meaningful way without CONFIG_OF,
> and there is no compile-time dependency.
> 
> Removing that #ifdef and the respective of_match_ptr() avoids the
> warning and simplifies the driver slightly.
> 
> Fixes: 2ae2e28852f2 ("misc: sram: add Atmel securam support")

What tree is this commit in?  I can't seem to find it in one of mine, am
I just missing it somewhere?

thanks,

greg "I have too many git trees" k-h

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1532718

FromAlexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>
Date2016-11-29 21:00 +0100
Message-ID<sIWJj-4l9-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1532717
On 29/11/2016 at 20:41:54 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote :
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 03:30:54PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > A recent patch added a new function that is now unused whenever
> > CONFIG_OF is disabled:
> > 
> > drivers/misc/sram.c:342:12: error: 'atmel_securam_wait' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
> > 
> > There is actually no reason for the #ifdef, because the driver
> > currently cannot be used in a meaningful way without CONFIG_OF,
> > and there is no compile-time dependency.
> > 
> > Removing that #ifdef and the respective of_match_ptr() avoids the
> > warning and simplifies the driver slightly.
> > 
> > Fixes: 2ae2e28852f2 ("misc: sram: add Atmel securam support")
> 
> What tree is this commit in?  I can't seem to find it in one of mine, am
> I just missing it somewhere?
> 

It is in arm-soc (it went through the mach-at91 tree)

-- 
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1532731

FromGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Date2016-11-29 21:10 +0100
Message-ID<sIWT0-4En-23@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1532718
On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 08:54:00PM +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> On 29/11/2016 at 20:41:54 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote :
> > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 03:30:54PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > A recent patch added a new function that is now unused whenever
> > > CONFIG_OF is disabled:
> > > 
> > > drivers/misc/sram.c:342:12: error: 'atmel_securam_wait' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
> > > 
> > > There is actually no reason for the #ifdef, because the driver
> > > currently cannot be used in a meaningful way without CONFIG_OF,
> > > and there is no compile-time dependency.
> > > 
> > > Removing that #ifdef and the respective of_match_ptr() avoids the
> > > warning and simplifies the driver slightly.
> > > 
> > > Fixes: 2ae2e28852f2 ("misc: sram: add Atmel securam support")
> > 
> > What tree is this commit in?  I can't seem to find it in one of mine, am
> > I just missing it somewhere?
> > 
> 
> It is in arm-soc (it went through the mach-at91 tree)

Ah, ok, nothing I can do about it then, nice!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1532851

FromAlexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>
Date2016-11-30 00:40 +0100
Message-ID<sJ0ae-6Ce-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1532731
On 29/11/2016 at 21:01:53 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote :
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 08:54:00PM +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > On 29/11/2016 at 20:41:54 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote :
> > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 03:30:54PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > A recent patch added a new function that is now unused whenever
> > > > CONFIG_OF is disabled:
> > > > 
> > > > drivers/misc/sram.c:342:12: error: 'atmel_securam_wait' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
> > > > 
> > > > There is actually no reason for the #ifdef, because the driver
> > > > currently cannot be used in a meaningful way without CONFIG_OF,
> > > > and there is no compile-time dependency.
> > > > 
> > > > Removing that #ifdef and the respective of_match_ptr() avoids the
> > > > warning and simplifies the driver slightly.
> > > > 
> > > > Fixes: 2ae2e28852f2 ("misc: sram: add Atmel securam support")
> > > 
> > > What tree is this commit in?  I can't seem to find it in one of mine, am
> > > I just missing it somewhere?
> > > 
> > 
> > It is in arm-soc (it went through the mach-at91 tree)
> 
> Ah, ok, nothing I can do about it then, nice!

Yeah, I was thinking Arnd would take it directly.

-- 
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web