lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jun]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v1 2/2] mfd: intel_soc_pmic_chtwc: Switch from __maybe_unused to pm_sleep_ptr() etc
On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 10:38:34AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> On 6/16/22 19:10, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Letting the compiler remove these functions when the kernel is built
> > without CONFIG_PM_SLEEP support is simpler and less heavier for builds
> > than the use of __maybe_unused attributes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
>
> I don't see how this helps, __maybe_unused only means the compiler should not
> warn AFAIK it is still allowed to remove static globals which are unused
> even of they are marked __maybe_unused ?

__maybe_unused will force compiler to compile and linker to drop the section.
The proposed approach saves resources on build, i.e. it's already compiler that
decides not to compile the code.

> And DEFINE_SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS does not mark the dev_pm_ops as
> __maybe_unused where as pm_sleep_ptr() will not reference the struct
> when CONFIG_PM is not set.
>
> But I guess that the new PTR_IF magic:
>
> #define PTR_IF(cond, ptr) ((cond) ? (ptr) : NULL)
>
> Still counts as referencing the struct so we don't get
> an unused warning and since cond is a const 0 value the compiler
> can optimize things away ?

See above, it's not olny about warning and compiler.


--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-06-20 11:40    [W:1.091 / U:0.688 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site