[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <994e4827-0e16-4e05-be7c-1ca7a86e4daf@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2025 13:38:16 +0100
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "Stanislaw Gruszka" <stf_xl@...pl>, "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...nel.org>
Cc: "Johannes Berg" <johannes@...solutions.net>,
"Kalle Valo" <kvalo@...nel.org>, "Ben Hutchings" <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
linux <linux@...blig.org>, "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v2] iwlegacy: don't warn for unused variables with DEBUG_FS=n
On Sat, Mar 1, 2025, at 13:28, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 03:53:53PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>
> But then the code will be compiled for !CONFIG_MAC80211_DEBUGFS
> case, it does compile for me:
>
> - 22475 1160 0 23635
> 5c53 drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/4965-rs.o
> + 23008 1168 0 24176
> 5e70 drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlegacy/4965-rs.o
Very strange, this really shouldn't happen. Which symbols
exactly do you see the compiler fail to drop with my patch,
and which compiler version are you using?
> How about moving
> static const struct il_rate_mcs_info il_rate_mcs[RATE_COUNT]
> under CONFIG_MAC80211_DEBUGFS ? Maybe inside the function that use it ?
It's not supposed to make a difference, let's try to figure
out if there is a compiler bug or a mistake in my patch first
and then fix it in the right place.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists