From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755407Ab1HWNYN (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:24:13 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:57060 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754898Ab1HWNYJ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:24:09 -0400 Subject: Re: warning: =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=98x86=5Fget=5Fevent=5Fconstraints=E2=80=99?= defined but not used From: Peter Zijlstra To: Kevin Winchester Cc: acme@ghostprotocols.net, mingo@elte.hu, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 15:23:59 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Mailer: Evolution 3.0.2- Message-ID: <1314105839.8002.51.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2011-08-15 at 20:40 -0300, Kevin Winchester wrote: > Is there are reason why those C > files are included directly in another C file rather than being linked > together? Sheer suckyness on my part.. we needed a 'quick' fix to make these CPU_SUP_* things build at all and never got around to cleaning it up afterwards. > Or is there some other way the code could be improved and > also remove the warning at the same time? creation of a arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.h and enough code massage to make all these .c files compile independently would be appreciated, not sure that'll immediately solve your issue though. > I do not mind doing some coding here to make this happen. I am very > close to a warning-free build, so I would definitely like to take care > of this one. You could slip something like it into the 'cleanup' if nothing else presents itself :-)