Re: [PATCH 1/3] crypto: caam: fix some compile warnings

[yjin]

On 2015å03æ04æ 10:32, yjin wrote:
> On 2015å03æ04æ 02:59, Kim Phillips wrote:
> > On Tue, 3 Mar 2015 14:50:51 +0800
> > <yanjiang.jin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > This commit is to avoid the below warnings:
> > >
> > > drivers/crypto/caam/sg_sw_sec4.h:88:12: warning:
> > > 'dma_map_sg_chained' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
> > >   static int dma_map_sg_chained(struct device *dev, struct 
> > > scatterlist *sg,
> > >              ^
> > > drivers/crypto/caam/sg_sw_sec4.h:104:12: warning:
> > > 'dma_unmap_sg_chained' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
> > >   static int dma_unmap_sg_chained(struct device *dev,
> > >              ^
> > I'm not seeing these warnings - both caamalg.c and caamhash.c use
> > those functions fine.
>
> As you said, both caamalg.c and caamhash.c use those functions, so no 
> warning reported.
>
> But if a new file just wants to include "sg_sw_sec4.h", doesn't want 
> to use these functions, the above warnings will appear.
>
> We can find an example in Freescale SDK 1.6:
> caampkc.c includes pkc_desc.h, pkc_desc.h includes sg_sw_sec4.h, but 
> caampkc.c doesn't call those functions.
>
> Without my patch, every file which includes sg_sw_sec4.h must call 
> these two functions in the future, I don't think it is a good idea.
>
> Thanks!
> Yanjiang
> > > -static int dma_map_sg_chained(struct device *dev, struct 
> > > scatterlist *sg,
> > > +static inline int dma_map_sg_chained(struct device *dev, struct 
> > > scatterlist *sg,
> > >                     unsigned int nents, enum dma_data_direction dir,
> > >                     bool chained)
> > not to mention this isn't how to fix a defined but not used warning:
> > marking the functions inline results in different compiler output.
> >
> > NACK from me.
An alternative is moving the definitions to a ".c" file, but I don't 
think it will be fundamental different.
I know I am fixing a potential error which doesn't exist now, it seems 
useless for the current upstream version, we can abandon my patch. But I 
still think the current implementation adds unnecessary restrictions for 
its users.

Thanks!
Yanjiang
> > Kim
>
> --
> 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/

--
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/