All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] clocksource: Fix build in non-OF case
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 13:10:44 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130328131044.GA18316@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201303281308.22738.arnd@arndb.de>

On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 01:08:22PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 28 March 2013, Mark Brown wrote:

> > That still looks like it'll reference the function?

> Yes, that is intentional. The idea is to create a reference to the
> function so gcc doesn't complain about unused symbols if the function
> gets marked static, but at the same time mark the data structure we
> define as unused so gcc can drop the structure as well as the function
> if they are not referenced from anywhere else.  This should let us
> get away with fewer #ifdef hacks in the code, better build-time coverage
> but without producing larger object code.

So GCC is supposed to be smart enough to figure this out and users need
to not do the ifdefs?  I have to say this does seem a bit surprising
from a user point of view but it does make sense from a general niceness
point of view.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20130328/b570317d/attachment.sig>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>,
	Axel Lin <axel.lin@ingics.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clocksource: Fix build in non-OF case
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 13:10:44 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130328131044.GA18316@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201303281308.22738.arnd@arndb.de>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 887 bytes --]

On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 01:08:22PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 28 March 2013, Mark Brown wrote:

> > That still looks like it'll reference the function?

> Yes, that is intentional. The idea is to create a reference to the
> function so gcc doesn't complain about unused symbols if the function
> gets marked static, but at the same time mark the data structure we
> define as unused so gcc can drop the structure as well as the function
> if they are not referenced from anywhere else.  This should let us
> get away with fewer #ifdef hacks in the code, better build-time coverage
> but without producing larger object code.

So GCC is supposed to be smart enough to figure this out and users need
to not do the ifdefs?  I have to say this does seem a bit surprising
from a user point of view but it does make sense from a general niceness
point of view.

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2013-03-28 13:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-03-28 12:30 [PATCH] clocksource: Fix build in non-OF case Mark Brown
2013-03-28 12:30 ` Mark Brown
2013-03-28 12:39 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-03-28 12:39   ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-03-28 12:55   ` Mark Brown
2013-03-28 12:55     ` Mark Brown
2013-03-28 13:08     ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-03-28 13:08       ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-03-28 13:10       ` Mark Brown [this message]
2013-03-28 13:10         ` Mark Brown
2013-03-28 14:47         ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-03-28 14:47           ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-03-29 18:30           ` Mark Brown
2013-03-29 18:30             ` Mark Brown

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20130328131044.GA18316@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
    --to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.