linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next] media: staging: tegra-vde: Mark tegra_vde_runtime_suspend as __maybe

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]

Message-ID: <95162bdc-2658-30a7-6ed2-63e095244139@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 3 Aug 2020 17:11:23 +0300
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To:     Yuehaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>, mchehab@...nel.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, thierry.reding@...il.com,
        jonathanh@...dia.com, hverkuil-cisco@...all.nl
Cc:     linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] media: staging: tegra-vde: Mark
 tegra_vde_runtime_suspend as __maybe_unused

03.08.2020 16:00, Yuehaibing пишет:
> On 2020/8/3 20:51, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> 03.08.2020 14:59, YueHaibing пишет:
>>> If CONFIG_PM is not set, gcc warns:
>>>
>>> drivers/staging/media/tegra-vde/vde.c:916:12:
>>>  warning: 'tegra_vde_runtime_suspend' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
>>>
>>> Make it __maybe_unused to fix this.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/staging/media/tegra-vde/vde.c | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/tegra-vde/vde.c b/drivers/staging/media/tegra-vde/vde.c
>>> index a3c24d96d5b9..2d043d518eef 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/staging/media/tegra-vde/vde.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/staging/media/tegra-vde/vde.c
>>> @@ -913,7 +913,7 @@ static irqreturn_t tegra_vde_isr(int irq, void *data)
>>>  	return IRQ_HANDLED;
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> -static int tegra_vde_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev)
>>> +static __maybe_unused int tegra_vde_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev)
>>>  {
>>>  	struct tegra_vde *vde = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>>  	int err;
>>>
>>
>> Hello Yue,
>>
>> Shouldn't the tegra_vde_runtime_resume() be marked as well?
> 
> No, tegra_vde_runtime_resume() always be called by tegra_vde_shutdown().

Well.. it's unused, but compiler doesn't complain about runtime_resume()
because it sees the potential reference to that function in the code
(even that it's a dead code), while runtime_suspend() reference is
completely removed by preprocessor before compiler sees the code.

Should be nicer to have both suspend and resume functions marked, for
consistency, IMO.