Re: [RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline functions

From	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline functions
Date	2017-06-07 08:00 +0200
Message-ID	<tPCaB-2s3-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(2 earlier) <tPkGJ-82Q-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <tPpGq-2N6-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <tPud4-5O1-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <tPud4-5O1-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <tPx1f-7Cp-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Tue, 6 Jun 2017, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:

> Unfortunately as is the patch doesn't work:
> 
> include/linux/compiler-clang.h:20:9: error: 'inline' macro redefined [-Werror,-Wmacro-redefined]
> #define inline inline __attribute__((unused))
>         ^
> include/linux/compiler-gcc.h:78:9: note: previous definition is here
> #define inline          inline          notrace
> 
> Another version of David's patch (https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/5/24/878)
> first undefines 'inline' before redefining it:
> 
> #ifdef inline
> #undef inline
> #define inline inline __attribute__((unused))
> #endif
> 
> This works at least in the sense of not causing compiler errors. I
> couldn't validate if it actually still indicates the compiler to
> inline a function, since in any case 'inline' is only a
> recommendation. In the few experiments I did without the patch clang
> didn't make a difference between static inline and non-inline
> functions.
> 
> The redefinition above could be used to fix the build error, however
> it would imply to lose the extra attributes from compiler-gcc.h.
> 

I've followed up with a patch that handles this behavior in compiler-gcc.h 
since clang defines __GNUC__ as well, so clang gets both compiler-gcc.h 
and compiler-clang.h behavior.

I've tested it, but please feel free to add your Tested-by for more 
confidence in the change.

Linus, who currently maintains include/linux/compiler*.h changes?  I see 
only an entry for a sparse maintainer.  I'd happily manage a cross 
compiler setup if it would be helpful to prevent this type of issue in the 
future.  First question would be if there is a minimum gcc major version 
intended to be supported?

Thread

[RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline functions Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org> - 2017-05-30 20:20 +0200
  Re: [RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline functions Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org> - 2017-06-01 02:00 +0200
    Re: [RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline functions Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2017-06-06 13:20 +0200
      Re: [RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline functions Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-06-06 18:40 +0200
        Re: [RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline functions Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org> - 2017-06-06 23:30 +0200
          Re: [RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline functions Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> - 2017-06-06 23:30 +0200
            Re: [RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline functions Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org> - 2017-06-07 02:30 +0200
              Re: [RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline  functions David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> - 2017-06-07 08:00 +0200
          Re: [RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline functions Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk> - 2017-06-06 23:30 +0200
            Re: [RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline functions Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2017-06-07 10:20 +0200
              Re: [RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline  functions Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2017-06-07 15:00 +0200
                Re: [RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline functions Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2017-06-07 15:20 +0200

csiph-web