[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20250122065216.1371158-1-arnd@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 07:52:10 +0100
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] cpufreq: s3c64xx: hide unused variable
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
A previous compiler warning fix extended an #ifdef block, but that
led to another warning in some builds:
drivers/cpufreq/s3c64xx-cpufreq.c:27:28: error: 's3c64xx_dvfs_table' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-variable]
27 | static struct s3c64xx_dvfs s3c64xx_dvfs_table[] = {
Add yet another #ifdef check around that variable.
Fixes: 76b218721e5f ("cpufreq: s3c64xx: Fix compilation warning")
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
---
I wonder if the driver should instead depend on CONFIG_REGULATOR
and drop the #ifdef checks.
---
drivers/cpufreq/s3c64xx-cpufreq.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/s3c64xx-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/s3c64xx-cpufreq.c
index 8fc43a74cefb..9cef71528076 100644
--- a/drivers/cpufreq/s3c64xx-cpufreq.c
+++ b/drivers/cpufreq/s3c64xx-cpufreq.c
@@ -24,6 +24,7 @@ struct s3c64xx_dvfs {
unsigned int vddarm_max;
};
+#ifdef CONFIG_REGULATOR
static struct s3c64xx_dvfs s3c64xx_dvfs_table[] = {
[0] = { 1000000, 1150000 },
[1] = { 1050000, 1150000 },
@@ -31,6 +32,7 @@ static struct s3c64xx_dvfs s3c64xx_dvfs_table[] = {
[3] = { 1200000, 1350000 },
[4] = { 1300000, 1350000 },
};
+#endif
static struct cpufreq_frequency_table s3c64xx_freq_table[] = {
{ 0, 0, 66000 },
--
2.39.5
Powered by blists - more mailing lists