From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752192Ab2GVAH7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Jul 2012 20:07:59 -0400 Received: from shutemov.name ([176.9.204.213]:44184 "EHLO shutemov.name" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752036Ab2GVAH6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Jul 2012 20:07:58 -0400 Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 03:08:40 +0300 From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: lenb@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: fix pwr_btn_event_pending build error Message-ID: <20120722000838.GA15798@shutemov.name> References: <20120721214156.GA2515@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20120721215243.GA15362@shutemov.name> <20120721233714.GL2435@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20120721233714.GL2435@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 04:37:14PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 12:52:43AM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 02:41:56PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > Hello! > > > > > > A recent build for KVM on x86 resulted in the following build error: > > > > > > drivers/acpi/sleep.c:60:13: warning: ‘pwr_btn_event_pending’ defined but not > > > +used [-Wunused-variable] > > > > > > This patch silences this error. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/sleep.c b/drivers/acpi/sleep.c > > > index 8856102..18347aa 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/acpi/sleep.c > > > +++ b/drivers/acpi/sleep.c > > > @@ -57,7 +57,9 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(gts, "Enable evaluation of _GTS on suspend."); > > > MODULE_PARM_DESC(bfs, "Enable evaluation of _BFS on resume".); > > > > > > static u8 sleep_states[ACPI_S_STATE_COUNT]; > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP > > > static bool pwr_btn_event_pending; > > > +#endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP */ > > > > __maybe_unused ? > > Are the compiler and linker smart enough to get rid of the storage in > case it really isn't used? (Not that the storage for a bool is worth > worrying about, but...) GCC with optimization enabled will get rid of the storage even without __maybe_unused. -- Kirill A. Shutemov