Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Sat, 12 Dec 2009 18:49:38 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] smc91x: fix unused flags warnings on UP systems |
| |
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 15:15:02 -0800 (PST) David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> > Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 08:40:04 -0500 > > > Local flags variables will be declared whenever these functions get used, > > but obviously on UP systems the flags parameter won't be touched. So add > > some dummy ops that get optimized away anyways to satisfy gcc's warnings. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> > > Applied, although I thought we had a standard macro to handle this > kind of case.
Nope.
Coverting them to real C functions fixes the warning, and provides previously-absent typechecking. ie, (untested):
--- a/drivers/net/smc91x.c~a +++ a/drivers/net/smc91x.c @@ -534,9 +534,18 @@ static inline void smc_rcv(struct net_d #define smc_special_lock(lock, flags) spin_lock_irqsave(lock, flags) #define smc_special_unlock(lock, flags) spin_unlock_irqrestore(lock, flags) #else -#define smc_special_trylock(lock, flags) (1) -#define smc_special_lock(lock, flags) do { } while (0) -#define smc_special_unlock(lock, flags) do { } while (0) +static inline int smc_special_trylock(spinlock_t *lock, unsigned long flags) +{ + return 1; +} + +static inline void smc_special_lock(spinlock_t *lock, unsigned long flags) +{ +} + +static inline void smc_special_unlock(spinlock_t *lock, unsigned long flags) +{ +} #endif /* _
| |