From: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
To: Ryan Neph <ryanneph@google.com>
Cc: "Lucas De Marchi" <lucas.demarchi@intel.com>,
"Thomas Hellström" <thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com>,
"Rodrigo Vivi" <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com>,
"David Airlie" <airlied@gmail.com>,
"Simona Vetter" <simona@ffwll.ch>,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/xe/configfs: fix clang warnings for missing parameter name
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2025 11:05:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251020110513.48d18788@pumpkin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251017-rn-cfi-v1-2-bf66e6ad4fcd@google.com>
On Fri, 17 Oct 2025 12:46:26 -0700
Ryan Neph <ryanneph@google.com> wrote:
> Fixes warning from clang-17 that look like:
>
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_configfs.h:35:97: error: omitting the parameter name in a function definition is a C2x extension [-Werror,-Wc2x-extensions]
> 35 | static inline u32 xe_configfs_get_ctx_restore_post_bb(struct pci_dev *pdev, enum xe_engine_class,
Why did that become invalid?
It has pretty much always been used - and can be used to avoid -Wshadow warnings.
This looks like a clang bug.
And you'd want a specific -W 'knob' for it as well.
At a guess the C2x extension lets the name be omitted in the function body for
an unused parameter (the same as C++).
I think that is the 'definition' and the ones being changed here are the 'declaration'.
But I might be wrong.
David
>
> Signed-off-by: Ryan Neph <ryanneph@google.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_configfs.h | 10 ++++++----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_configfs.h b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_configfs.h
> index fed57be0b90e146d57d966bab0e55e1723513997..a0d614b37efd54b89390f04a238aef1a8d4df4e2 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_configfs.h
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_configfs.h
> @@ -21,9 +21,9 @@ bool xe_configfs_primary_gt_allowed(struct pci_dev *pdev);
> bool xe_configfs_media_gt_allowed(struct pci_dev *pdev);
> u64 xe_configfs_get_engines_allowed(struct pci_dev *pdev);
> bool xe_configfs_get_psmi_enabled(struct pci_dev *pdev);
> -u32 xe_configfs_get_ctx_restore_mid_bb(struct pci_dev *pdev, enum xe_engine_class,
> +u32 xe_configfs_get_ctx_restore_mid_bb(struct pci_dev *pdev, enum xe_engine_class class,
> const u32 **cs);
> -u32 xe_configfs_get_ctx_restore_post_bb(struct pci_dev *pdev, enum xe_engine_class,
> +u32 xe_configfs_get_ctx_restore_post_bb(struct pci_dev *pdev, enum xe_engine_class class,
> const u32 **cs);
> #ifdef CONFIG_PCI_IOV
> unsigned int xe_configfs_get_max_vfs(struct pci_dev *pdev);
> @@ -37,9 +37,11 @@ static inline bool xe_configfs_primary_gt_allowed(struct pci_dev *pdev) { return
> static inline bool xe_configfs_media_gt_allowed(struct pci_dev *pdev) { return true; }
> static inline u64 xe_configfs_get_engines_allowed(struct pci_dev *pdev) { return U64_MAX; }
> static inline bool xe_configfs_get_psmi_enabled(struct pci_dev *pdev) { return false; }
> -static inline u32 xe_configfs_get_ctx_restore_mid_bb(struct pci_dev *pdev, enum xe_engine_class,
> +static inline u32 xe_configfs_get_ctx_restore_mid_bb(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> + enum xe_engine_class class,
> const u32 **cs) { return 0; }
> -static inline u32 xe_configfs_get_ctx_restore_post_bb(struct pci_dev *pdev, enum xe_engine_class,
> +static inline u32 xe_configfs_get_ctx_restore_post_bb(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> + enum xe_engine_class class,
> const u32 **cs) { return 0; }
> static inline unsigned int xe_configfs_get_max_vfs(struct pci_dev *pdev) { return UINT_MAX; }
> #endif
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-20 12:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-17 19:46 [PATCH 0/2] Fix additional sysfs node access CFI violations Ryan Neph
2025-10-17 19:46 ` [PATCH 1/2] drm/xe/sysfs: " Ryan Neph
2025-10-17 19:46 ` [PATCH 2/2] drm/xe/configfs: fix clang warnings for missing parameter name Ryan Neph
2025-10-20 10:05 ` David Laight [this message]
2025-10-21 6:39 ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-10-21 16:47 ` Ryan Neph
2025-10-22 16:38 ` David Laight
2025-10-17 19:53 ` ✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for Fix additional sysfs node access CFI violations Patchwork
2025-10-17 19:54 ` ✓ CI.KUnit: success " Patchwork
2025-10-17 20:33 ` ✓ Xe.CI.BAT: " Patchwork
2025-10-18 19:05 ` ✗ Xe.CI.Full: failure " Patchwork
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=20251020110513.48d18788@pumpkin \
--to=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=airlied@gmail.com \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lucas.demarchi@intel.com \
--cc=rodrigo.vivi@intel.com \
--cc=ryanneph@google.com \
--cc=simona@ffwll.ch \
--cc=thomas.hellstrom@linux.intel.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox