From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A524F285050 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2025 07:45:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762501561; cv=none; b=axrC9AFfWgLnnFyCmMrFtVxa60V+BK0Z3bleL4WCUWcjDARk+SaFDccd+AoJK9Z3jexQRQhBO9RwVoISUredmWyjjLQIbs86zkUEH1rqcXDpG9eDoYmrG8jJEKf9LjSdEuA1Jm8UTEIbD2zzV0hrfsRL5eNi2N9aTJXtTPf2u2w= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762501561; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+diiEQPiVT7tccwuYGJss8sQks1bsZk0Dz/jt7Hp4MM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=FHKQib3HVmsDPyuNz9pSgGDc4csVHuimsePfopkN13W+60jEIyVJ+AI9pYVmRQeo73rDwfUs9yGjwSVeZYkJNlLzTzSi9hIMHv8tEtKff0rS041l5whFG5jzCBUKh7rJQVNZNdb8hcWtgH6Q12TusnhCNZ8TcHWRnYN1Oaw+TG4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=hUSdhOz8; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="hUSdhOz8" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1762501560; x=1794037560; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=+diiEQPiVT7tccwuYGJss8sQks1bsZk0Dz/jt7Hp4MM=; b=hUSdhOz8ZtTULBZWKc6e0PCGBaEYghKrTVjXQaZ1Flcfy6rAgnIKFqBE 2VAjDJX7GClqaN1UNNGNCIn2tMabS+IN0cwirOj40UkyM1edPf0fmOatP ZE0mUF0RxJ5VfMDTu+HIsrHNlpaF+8o/SgiXbIywejaGSoIgVchh5VPoC in9tyE0oF/He5QzpxrecHow9dnuU4xszv4hw0yjxLgc0jN9E+sLtg64UY eYR0HhEzzpquvpIh9LTQumFZxKOgazPbaacAIrQDkMB8SxbbnZx645Vqt 0Xy/fOMPdQtRReQygXlinSXEui5nFhHW2T3QOHlW8yAxnUT5DahaGlVJW Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: fNN6PBVISjGHVGSGt8E+oA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: eQpkSc1lRqKkAANf/OWz3g== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11605"; a="52215312" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.19,286,1754982000"; d="scan'208";a="52215312" Received: from orviesa002.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.142]) by fmvoesa110.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Nov 2025 23:45:59 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: rodQ50wXSxKNS3HfDIURBA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: mlPeMpl2R4iQxVCE/GGGmw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.19,286,1754982000"; d="scan'208";a="218630898" Received: from vpanait-mobl.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO ashevche-desk.local) ([10.245.245.27]) by orviesa002-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Nov 2025 23:45:56 -0800 Received: from andy by ashevche-desk.local with local (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1vHHAP-00000006OJt-2Ugh; Fri, 07 Nov 2025 09:45:53 +0200 Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 09:45:53 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Nathan Chancellor Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev, Nick Desaulniers , Bill Wendling , Justin Stitt , Linus Torvalds , Dan Williams , Jonathan Cameron , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] compiler_types: Warn about unused static inline functions on second Message-ID: References: <20251106105000.2103276-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> <20251106151649.GA1693433@ax162> <20251106170616.GB1693433@ax162> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20251106170616.GB1693433@ax162> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs, Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo On Thu, Nov 06, 2025 at 10:06:16AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote: > On Thu, Nov 06, 2025 at 06:01:03PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 06, 2025 at 08:16:49AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote: > > > and we should > > > probably drop the sentence about removing __inline_maybe_unused entirely > > > since people such as Peter will never want this behavior by default. I > > > do not mind doing it myself if I take it. > > > > But future is uncertain, it might be that GCC also gains this and it won't > > confuse anyway as it might become a truth (no more such warnings in the code) > > at some point. > > The reality of the situation is that moving this warning to W=2 is > basically the same as just turning it off entirely since building with > W=2 is not a common endeavor for the majority of folks actually writing > kernel code, so the number of warnings will just continue to grow. At > that point, there is very little reason to believe that we would be able > to go from W=2 to enabled by default at some point in the future since > people already do not like it enabled at W=1 where it is not as > impactful as enabled by default. As a result, I feel like the comment > genuinely serves no purpose. If GCC were to change its behavior to > match clang, I feel like kernel folks would still want the current GCC > behavior. Okay, I won't object. But so far the patch taken as is, please fold the changes you mention in it (will require rebase, but personally I don't care, all depends on your workflow, followup is also fine to me). And thanks for taking care of this! -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko