From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Quentin Perret Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] PM / OPP: Introduce a power estimation helper Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2019 09:34:21 +0000 Message-ID: <20190131093418.umsbh4eevgod42sh@queper01-lin> References: <20190130170506.20450-1-quentin.perret@arm.com> <20190130170506.20450-2-quentin.perret@arm.com> <20190130190703.GM81583@google.com> <20190131072209.nhbgid3cystvr2p5@vireshk-i7> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190131072209.nhbgid3cystvr2p5@vireshk-i7> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Viresh Kumar Cc: Matthias Kaehlcke , sudeep.holla@arm.com, rjw@rjwysocki.net, nm@ti.com, sboyd@kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 31 Jan 2019 at 12:52:09 (+0530), Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 30-01-19, 11:07, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 05:05:02PM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote: > > > +static int __maybe_unused _get_cpu_power(unsigned long *mW, unsigned long *kHz, > > > + int cpu) > > > > why __maybe_unused? > > Yeah, it isn't required I think. He probably added it for the case > where CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL=n, but even then an inline routine is > defined which will accept it as argument and wouldn't do anything with > it. Had it been a macro, we would have required __maybe_unused but not > now. The thing is, the EM_DATA_CB() macro _is_ stubbed for CONFIG_ENERGY_MODEL=n: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.0-rc4/source/include/linux/energy_model.h#L165 So, without __maybe_unused you get do get a compiler warning. Thanks, Quentin > > -- > viresh