Re: [patch 01/10] compiler: define __attribute_unused__

[David Rientjes]

On Wed, 2 May 2007, Robert P. J. Day wrote:

>   not only that, but there are numerous files that *already* use
> "__unused":
> 
> $ grep -rw __unused *
> ... snip lots of output here ...
> 
> as well as a few files that can now have their definition of that
> removed:
> 
> $ grep -r "define __unused" *
> drivers/net/defxx.c:#define __unused __attribute__ ((unused))
> drivers/net/declance.c:#define __unused __attribute__ ((unused))
> drivers/misc/thinkpad_acpi.c:#define __unused __attribute__ ((unused))
> 
>   i think "__unused" is the clear choice here.
> 

No, it's not the clear choice.  This would apply to both functions and 
variables so the suppress a compiler warning for a variable whose use 
depends on preprocessor macros, I would have to use __unused even though 
it may be used.

Hence, I recommend __maybe_unused.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/