From: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
To: "kernel test robot" <lkp@intel.com>,
"Nícolas F. R. A. Prado" <nfraprado@collabora.com>
Cc: "Nícolas F. R. A. Prado" <nfraprado@collabora.com>,
"Tzung-Bi Shih" <tzungbi@kernel.org>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev,
kernel@collabora.com,
"AngeloGioacchino Del Regno"
<angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>,
"Julius Werner" <jwerner@chromium.org>,
chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] firmware: google: cbmem: Add to module device table
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2024 09:40:55 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zaa_pwuPOMCQV4GD@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202401151013.Xioj5wZo-lkp@intel.com>
Hi Nicolas,
On Mon, Jan 15, 2024 at 10:53:48AM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
>
> >> drivers/firmware/google/cbmem.c:118:40: warning: unused variable 'cbmem_ids' [-Wunused-const-variable]
> 118 | static const struct coreboot_device_id cbmem_ids[] = {
> | ^~~~~~~~~
> 1 warning generated.
>
>
> vim +/cbmem_ids +118 drivers/firmware/google/cbmem.c
>
> 117
> > 118 static const struct coreboot_device_id cbmem_ids[] = {
> 119 { .tag = LB_TAG_CBMEM_ENTRY },
> 120 { /* sentinel */ }
> 121 };
> 122 MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(coreboot, cbmem_ids);
> 123
I was wondering why we have a seemingly unique "unused variable" failure
mode in comparison to other similarly-structured device/bus drivers, and
I realized that's because we're not relying on the same structure for
both MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE (struct coreboot_device_id) and for the driver
definition (struct coreboot_driver -> 'u32 tag'). Thus, this structure
is only used for #define MODULE builds, and otherwise not used.
Rather than wrapping these definitions in "#ifdef MODULE", perhaps we
can settle on a single field, and replace `struct coreboot_driver::tag`
with an instance of `struct coreboot_device_id`? That would normally be
a breaking change that would require changing all drivers at the same
time as the bus (or else some kind of intermediate transition state),
but considering there are only 4 driver implementations and they all
live under the same maintainer tree, that seems like it should still be
OK (IMO).
If it makes the series more readable/incremental, perhaps the switchover
can be the last patch in the series, and there can remain some
duplication (and potential -Wunused-const-variable issues) for the
middle of the series.
Brian
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-16 17:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-11 15:11 [PATCH 0/4] Allow coreboot modules to autoload and enable cbmem in the arm64 defconfig Nícolas F. R. A. Prado
2024-01-11 15:11 ` [PATCH 1/4] firmware: coreboot: Generate modalias uevent for devices Nícolas F. R. A. Prado
2024-01-12 0:37 ` Brian Norris
2024-01-12 12:24 ` Nícolas F. R. A. Prado
2024-01-11 15:11 ` [PATCH 3/4] firmware: google: cbmem: Add to module device table Nícolas F. R. A. Prado
2024-01-12 0:38 ` Brian Norris
2024-01-12 12:26 ` Nícolas F. R. A. Prado
2024-01-15 2:53 ` kernel test robot
2024-01-16 17:40 ` Brian Norris [this message]
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=Zaa_pwuPOMCQV4GD@google.com \
--to=briannorris@chromium.org \
--cc=angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com \
--cc=chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jwerner@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel@collabora.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=nfraprado@collabora.com \
--cc=oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=tzungbi@kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).