From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 96E1F1C3C04; Thu, 19 Jun 2025 14:22:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750342934; cv=none; b=i/SIrTEn7VnptT5q5mHlINgkv4siF7G7/EuudZLhxyH5w6oTBPPUyzr5wk9RQV6okIc1bQaXs2ajcDAMnaLrA3I39TSfbLnsLeBed65E43Klqbo9yTUW2K/jtLauiCaWtScqt4VmwgTdGZSzNNxIkppCseEkljbFIw2CzgucRww= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1750342934; c=relaxed/simple; bh=UUJ2Oo7w36PsdYpLovHSd8OEWg3RiaNcBSmrNY/hHH8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=fv/F+TG3YiWYTrpOOoUFid1IZ4aEzGMv69DRGzl/vqTcY+zGqK7nohZssDMyLYqSNE2VJW42QgYiTSOYkBJ3XjpGrgc45fqf12ayBxF2ZP8Exqy/oGalCH/d2/HsszVSaXFaUv3gnP64cFcMjjYtFrtQhF9Pnd1NQkjp3+EFSho= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=JXdVQp7x; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="JXdVQp7x" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D9865C4CEEA; Thu, 19 Jun 2025 14:22:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1750342934; bh=UUJ2Oo7w36PsdYpLovHSd8OEWg3RiaNcBSmrNY/hHH8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=JXdVQp7x/Xr3a71TZxt5MTs3bihXSgo5imc0jEqDayqa3z7P1c0N3uRPldIkequpx 7/t2cfjEUKWwxREv69jwySZUUrhHvoZ1Cr8tcyBpAUThfp/KShsUXOOQHD4fwsxjzj rMacuQWvFwU8st5sL04dgtkt4WAJ3cgaOLfieFgNBprow9tnMK8GLZS2zB/vt3Phj6 PQg6ntsDdn5JssAid08L7aG7rRIjzlU/u6wOCr/A9sZmhHbcmp+oaTNVfq5TnvTVyU K76XmQPTeDZEobLFQ4Q1y/iSvqRVoBVQPcVbaQmWgW//m5kkWYkGNNfbdMuqGZk46W MutITUgY5hF+Q== Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 07:22:13 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Vincent Mailhol , Marc Kleine-Budde , netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, linux-can@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 06/10] can: rcar_canfd: Repurpose f_dcfg base for other registers Message-ID: <20250619072213.3d84c100@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20250618092336.2175168-1-mkl@pengutronix.de> <20250618092336.2175168-7-mkl@pengutronix.de> <20250618183827.5bebca8f@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 12:16:00 +0200 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 at 06:43, Vincent Mailhol wrote: > > On Thu. 19 Jun. 2025 at 10:38, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 11:20:00 +0200 Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > > > > +static inline unsigned int rcar_canfd_f_cfdcrc(struct rcar_canfd_global *gpriv, > > > > + unsigned int ch) > > > > +{ > > > > + return gpriv->info->regs->coffset + 0x10 + 0x20 * ch; > > > > +} > > > > > > clang is no longer fooled by static inline, it identifies that 4 out of > > Oh well, that explains why someone pointed to a CI log showing more > unused functions in a different driver. I hope it only does that > for unused functions in .c files, not in header files? Yes, AFAIU it's clever enough to distinguish what came in from the headers. > > > these functions are never called. I think one ends up getting used in > > > patch 10 (just looking at warning counts), but the other 3 remain dead > > > code. Geert, do you have a strong attachment to having all helpers > > > defined or can we trim this, please? > > I would like to keep them (or at least the information), as it serves > as register documentation, just like the macros they replaced.... Okay, we'll pull, but we really should try to keep the tree free of W=1 warnings. The CI can deal with existing warnings but they will annoy humans doing development. Maybe there is a way to disable the warning selectively for rcar if you find it unhelpful? And then we'll see if some well meaning code janitor sends a patch to delete them anyway ;)