From: Vikram Narayanan <vikram186@gmail.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] common/spl: Mark arguments as unused
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 22:34:06 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <508D6586.2040708@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1351098693.17170.0@snotra>
On 10/24/2012 10:41 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 10/23/2012 11:14:34 PM, Vikram Narayanan wrote:
>> On 10/24/2012 7:22 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> On 10/23/2012 12:15:11 PM, Vikram Narayanan wrote:
>>>> On 10/23/2012 9:15 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:26:53PM +0200, Stefan Roese wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/23/2012 12:05 PM, Vikram Narayanan wrote:
>>>>>>> As dummy{1,2} are not used anywhere, mark it with __maybe_unused
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Vikram Narayanan<vikram186@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Stefan Roese<sr@denx.de>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> common/spl/spl.c | 2 +-
>>>>>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/common/spl/spl.c b/common/spl/spl.c
>>>>>>> index 0d829c0..62fd3bd 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/common/spl/spl.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/common/spl/spl.c
>>>>>>> @@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ static void spl_ram_load_image(void)
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> #endif
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -void board_init_r(gd_t *dummy1, ulong dummy2)
>>>>>>> +void board_init_r(__maybe_unused gd_t *dummy1, __maybe_unused
>>>>>>> ulong dummy2)
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> u32 boot_device;
>>>>>>> debug(">>spl:board_init_r()\n");
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Perhaps even __always_unused instead of __maybe_unused as these
>>>>>> variables are never used?
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, what does this give us? Fixing a sparse warning?
>>>>
>>>> Not a sparse warning. I noticed this while looking at the code.
>>>
>>> If there's no warning, why do we need to ugly up the code with
>>> __maybe_unused?
>>
>> I'd rather call this a proper way of coding, than calling it ugly. But
>> perceptions differ.
>
> If you want to push for a change to the official coding style, and
> changing the warning options to go with it, go ahead (I'll argue against
> it of course), but until and unless you succeed at that, this isn't the
> way U-Boot code is written. I don't see a single instance of
> __maybe_unused in an argument list, or a single instance of
> __always_unused anywhere in U-Boot other than its definition.
> Unnecessary clutter is harmful to readability.
It's not worth arguing over a single line of code that isn't going to
cause any significant change. That would save us both some time.
~Vikram
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-28 17:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-23 10:05 [U-Boot] [PATCH] common/spl: Mark arguments as unused Vikram Narayanan
2012-10-23 10:26 ` Stefan Roese
2012-10-23 10:55 ` Vikram Narayanan
2012-10-23 15:45 ` Tom Rini
2012-10-23 17:15 ` Vikram Narayanan
2012-10-24 1:52 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-24 4:14 ` Vikram Narayanan
2012-10-24 17:11 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-28 17:04 ` Vikram Narayanan [this message]
2012-10-29 16:34 ` Scott Wood
2012-10-29 18:54 ` Vikram Narayanan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=508D6586.2040708@gmail.com \
--to=vikram186@gmail.com \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox