linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gpio/exynos: Fix compiler warnings when non-exynos machines are selected

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 11 May 2012 18:29:12 -0600
From:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
To:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@...aro.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linus.walleij@...ricsson.com,
	patches@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio/exynos: Fix compiler warnings when non-exynos machines are selected

On Wed, 2 May 2012 01:26:12 +0200, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat@...aro.org> wrote:
> 
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS4) || defined(CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS5)
> > +#endif
> > -static struct samsung_gpio_chip exynos4_gpios_1[] = {
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS4
> > +static struct samsung_gpio_chip exynos4_gpios_1[] = {
> > -#endif
> > +#endif
> > -static struct samsung_gpio_chip exynos4_gpios_2[] = {
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS4
> > +static struct samsung_gpio_chip exynos4_gpios_2[] = {
> > -#endif
> > +#endif
> > -static struct samsung_gpio_chip exynos4_gpios_3[] = {
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS4
> > +static struct samsung_gpio_chip exynos4_gpios_3[] = {
> > -#endif
> > +#endif
> >  #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_EXYNOS5
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_CPU_EXYNOS4210) || defined(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)
> > +#endif
> > +#if defined(CONFIG_CPU_EXYNOS4210) || defined(CONFIG_SOC_EXYNOS5250)
> > +#endif
> 
> We really want to get rid of this kind of stuff from all drivers, #ifdefs are
> declared ugly already in Documentation/CodingStyle.
> 
> Any chance you could solve this problem by reworking the driver to
> pass some flag in platform data tell which exynos it's for
> and jist adapt at runtime instead of the compile-time quirkiness?
> 
> Besides looking better, it helps us to get to a single zImage for the
> exynoses too..

I don't see any single-zImage issues here.  There are no #else clauses
in the #ifdef blocks so all it does it compile out unused code when
exynos4 & 5 is not enabled. I'm going to apply it.

g.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/