Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 24 Nov 2022 10:17:02 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] arm64: armv8_deprecated: fix unused-function error | From | Ren Zhijie <> |
| |
在 2022/11/23 19:01, Mark Rutland 写道: > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 10:06:03AM +0800, Ren Zhijie wrote: >> 在 2022/11/23 0:48, Mark Rutland 写道: >>> On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 03:20:10AM +0000, Ren Zhijie wrote: >>>> If CONFIG_SWP_EMULATION is not set and >>>> CONFIG_CP15_BARRIER_EMULATION is not set, >>>> aarch64-linux-gnu complained about unused-function : >>>> >>>> arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c:67:21: error: ‘aarch32_check_condition’ defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function] >>>> static unsigned int aarch32_check_condition(u32 opcode, u32 psr) >>>> ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>>> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors >>>> >>>> To fix this error, warp the definition of >>>> aarch32_check_condition() by defined(CONFIG_SWP_EMULATION) || >>>> defined(CONFIG_CP15_BARRIER_EMULATION) >>>> >>>> Fixes: 0c5f416219da ("arm64: armv8_deprecated: move aarch32 helper earlier") >>> This also depends on building with additional options to turn warnings into >>> errors, no? >> No,i just run the normal command as follow: >> >> make ARCH="arm64" CROSS_COMPILE="aarch64-linux-gnu-" > I think you must also have CONFIG_WERROR enabled? > > Just building defconfig + CONFIG_ARMV8_DEPRECATED=y gives me a warning, but not > an error, and the kernel builds just fine. > > So this is a problem to fix, and I appreciate that in test configs this might > be broken, but it's not a full build-time failure for most users.
I get it, thanks a lot!
Thanks,
Ren
> Thanks, > Mark. > >>>> Signed-off-by: Ren Zhijie <renzhijie2@huawei.com> >>>> --- >>>> arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c | 2 ++ >>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c >>>> index ed0788cf6bbb..3f29ceb6653a 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c >>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/armv8_deprecated.c >>>> @@ -64,6 +64,7 @@ struct insn_emulation { >>>> #define ARM_OPCODE_CONDITION_UNCOND 0xf >>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_SWP_EMULATION) || defined(CONFIG_CP15_BARRIER_EMULATION) >>>> static unsigned int aarch32_check_condition(u32 opcode, u32 psr) >>>> { >>>> u32 cc_bits = opcode >> 28; >>>> @@ -76,6 +77,7 @@ static unsigned int aarch32_check_condition(u32 opcode, u32 psr) >>>> } >>>> return ARM_OPCODE_CONDTEST_UNCOND; >>>> } >>>> +#endif >>> Could we mark this as '__maybe_unused' or 'inline' instead? I think that's >>> preferable to the ifdeferry. >> sure, i will use __maybe_unused in v2. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Ren. >> >>> Thanks, >>> Mark. >>> >>>> #ifdef CONFIG_SWP_EMULATION >>>> /* >>>> -- >>>> 2.17.1 >>>> >>> . > .
| |