From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752138AbbAGJ7X (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2015 04:59:23 -0500 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([192.55.52.115]:37057 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750873AbbAGJ7U (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2015 04:59:20 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,713,1413270000"; d="scan'208";a="658034829" Message-ID: <54AD030E.5000201@intel.com> Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 11:57:34 +0200 From: Adrian Hunter Organization: Intel Finland Oy, Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki, Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4, Domiciled in Helsinki User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rickard Strandqvist CC: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Peter Zijlstra , Paul Mackerras , Ingo Molnar , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , Waiman Long , Stephane Eranian , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools: perf: util: dso: Remove some unused functions References: <1420232625-3628-1-git-send-email-rickard_strandqvist@spectrumdigital.se> <54AA3C1E.10200@intel.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/01/15 20:05, Rickard Strandqvist wrote: > 2015-01-05 8:24 GMT+01:00 Adrian Hunter : >> On 02/01/15 23:03, Rickard Strandqvist wrote: >>> Removes some functions that are not used anywhere: >>> dso__data_size() dso__data_status_seen() >>> >>> This was partially found by using a static code analysis program called cppcheck. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist >>> --- >> >> Please do not remove these. They are also preparation for Intel PT. >> > > > Hi > > Ok, sorry! > > But this obvious, or would it not be good to add same comments? The Intel PT preparation is a little unusual, and of course I am always optimistic about getting the rest of the patches added. Adding a comment only to remove it later seems a bit messy.