mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
To: <paulmck@linux.ibm.com>, <john.hubbard@gmail.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] lockdep: fix warning: print_lock_trace defined but not used
Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2019 16:38:15 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7336e00d-11d8-9be1-8856-92e47b42aa37@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190609135114.GX28207@linux.ibm.com>

On 6/9/19 6:51 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 12:08:08AM -0700, john.hubbard@gmail.com wrote:
>> From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
>>
>> Commit 0d2cc3b34532 ("locking/lockdep: Move valid_state() inside
>> CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS && CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING") moved the only usage of
>> print_lock_trace() that was originally outside of the CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING
>> case. It moved that usage into a different case: CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING &&
>> CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS. That leaves things not symmetrical, and as a result,
>> the following warning fires on my build, when I have
>>
>> !CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS && !CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING
>>
>> set:
>>
>> kernel/locking/lockdep.c:2821:13: warning: ‘print_lock_trace’ defined
>>     but not used [-Wunused-function]
>>
>> Fix this by only defining print_lock_trace() in cases in which is it
>> called.
>>
>> Fixes: 0d2cc3b34532 ("locking/lockdep: Move valid_state() inside CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS && CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING")
>> Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
>> Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
>> Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
>> ---
>>  kernel/locking/lockdep.c | 3 +++
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
>> index d06190fa5082..3065dc36c27a 100644
>> --- a/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
>> +++ b/kernel/locking/lockdep.c
>> @@ -2817,11 +2817,14 @@ static inline int validate_chain(struct task_struct *curr,
>>  	return 1;
>>  }
>>
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS)
>>  static void print_lock_trace(struct lock_trace *trace, unsigned int spaces)
> 
> This works, but another approach is to put "__maybe_unused" in the
> above declaration, which avoids the need to have "#if" in a .c file.


Good idea, that approach appeals to me here, because tracing is a natural fit
for "might not be used" types of functions.


> But this file already has quite a few #if and #ifdef commands, so maybe
> it is OK here.
> 
> Also, "#ifdef CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS" is a bit more conventional than
> the above, should the "__maybe_unused" be undesirable.

ah, OK, I'll keep that in mind. (The two seemed identical to my mind, but
it's good to make things look like surrounding code, of course.)

thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard
NVIDIA


> 
> Yet another approach is to move this function to include/linux/lockdep.h,
> where #ifdef is considered less objectionable.
> 
> But I must defer to the maintainers.
> 
> 							Thanx, Paul

  reply	other threads:[~2019-06-09 23:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-21  7:08 [PATCH 0/1] " john.hubbard
2019-05-21  7:08 ` [PATCH 1/1] " john.hubbard
2019-06-09 13:51   ` Paul E. McKenney
2019-06-09 23:38     ` John Hubbard [this message]
2019-06-10  0:09     ` [PATCH v2] " john.hubbard
2019-06-18 16:00       ` Paul E. McKenney

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=7336e00d-11d8-9be1-8856-92e47b42aa37@nvidia.com \
    --to=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=frederic@kernel.org \
    --cc=john.hubbard@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®