[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53AAE4D2.5020104@roeck-us.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:03:46 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sched: Fix compiler warnings
On 06/25/2014 07:49 AM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello Guenter,
>
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 07:27:47AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> Maybe the author's intention was:
>>>
>>> static inline int cpu_corepower_flags(void) __attribute__((const));
>>>
>>> ?
>>> This specifies that the function has no side effects and the return value
>>> only depends on the (here non-existing) function arguments.
>>>
>>
>> Possibly, but either I am missing something or this doesn't compile.
> You need to do a separate declaration:
>
> static inline int cpu_corepower_flags(void) __attribute__((const));
> static inline int cpu_corepower_flags(void)
> {
> ...
Actually turns out one can use __attribute_const__, and it is
static inline int __attribute_const__ cpu_corepower_flags(void)
which turns out to be widely used.
I'll change that and resubmit after testing.
Guenter
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists