From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: peterz@infradead.org (Peter Zijlstra)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 10:37:07 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] mutex: make mutex_lock_nested an inline function
In-Reply-To: <20151014082050.GQ17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <11282238.AHmyWliPRj@wuerfel>
 <20151013203812.GM17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <11817958.z9KtmeKzV7@wuerfel>
 <20151014082050.GQ17308@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Message-ID: <20151014083707.GR11639@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 10:20:50AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:30:08PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > The second argument of the mutex_lock_nested() helper is only
> > > > evaluated if CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC is set. Otherwise we
> > > > get this build warning for the new regulator_lock_supply
> > > > function:
> > > > 
> > > > drivers/regulator/core.c: In function 'regulator_lock_supply':
> > > > drivers/regulator/core.c:142:6: warning: unused variable 'i' [-Wunused-variable]
> > > > 
> > > > To avoid the warning, this patch changes the definition of
> > > > mutex_lock_nested() to be static inline function rather than
> > > > a macro, which tells gcc that the variable is potentially
> > > > used.
> 
> Uuh, I just looked at next and saw this regulator_lock_supply()
> function. How is that limited? subclass must be <8 otherwise bad things
> happen.

Also, the function appears unused, just delete it ;-)