[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YK0komOt7j8R9045@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2021 18:24:02 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@...nel.org>,
linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: hikey9xx: Remove defined but unused macros
On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 07:27:09PM +0200, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> Removed defined but unused macros. Issue detected by GCC running with
> -Wunused-macro warning option set.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@...il.com>
> ---
> drivers/staging/hikey9xx/hisi-spmi-controller.c | 9 ---------
> 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/hikey9xx/hisi-spmi-controller.c b/drivers/staging/hikey9xx/hisi-spmi-controller.c
> index 0d42bc65f39b..b64594e2a84b 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/hikey9xx/hisi-spmi-controller.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/hikey9xx/hisi-spmi-controller.c
> @@ -21,16 +21,10 @@
> #define SPMI_APB_SPMI_CMD_BASE_ADDR 0x0100
>
> #define SPMI_APB_SPMI_WDATA0_BASE_ADDR 0x0104
> -#define SPMI_APB_SPMI_WDATA1_BASE_ADDR 0x0108
> -#define SPMI_APB_SPMI_WDATA2_BASE_ADDR 0x010c
> -#define SPMI_APB_SPMI_WDATA3_BASE_ADDR 0x0110
>
> #define SPMI_APB_SPMI_STATUS_BASE_ADDR 0x0200
>
> #define SPMI_APB_SPMI_RDATA0_BASE_ADDR 0x0204
> -#define SPMI_APB_SPMI_RDATA1_BASE_ADDR 0x0208
> -#define SPMI_APB_SPMI_RDATA2_BASE_ADDR 0x020c
> -#define SPMI_APB_SPMI_RDATA3_BASE_ADDR 0x0210
>
> #define SPMI_PER_DATAREG_BYTE 4
> /*
> @@ -64,9 +58,6 @@ enum spmi_controller_cmd_op_code {
> #define SPMI_APB_TRANS_DONE BIT(0)
> #define SPMI_APB_TRANS_FAIL BIT(2)
>
> -/* Command register fields */
> -#define SPMI_CONTROLLER_CMD_MAX_BYTE_COUNT 16
> -
> /* Maximum number of support PMIC peripherals */
> #define SPMI_CONTROLLER_TIMEOUT_US 1000
> #define SPMI_CONTROLLER_MAX_TRANS_BYTES 16
> --
> 2.31.1
>
>
Leaving macros that are not used are fine to keep around, it documents
the hardware.
That's a pretty foolish gcc warning :(
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists