Re: [PATCH] igb: fix unused igb_deliver_wake_packet() warning when CONFIG_PM=n

[Jeff Kirsher]

On Wed, 2017-07-12 at 18:23 -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Dave Hansen
> <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > I'm seeing warnings on kernel configurations where CONFIG_PM is
> > disabled.  It happens in 4.12, at least:
> > 
> > drivers/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c:7988:13: warning:
> > 'igb_deliver_wake_packet' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
> > 
> > This is because igb_deliver_wake_packet() is defined outside of
> > the #ifdef", but is used only a single time within the #ifdef in
> > igb_resume().  Fix it by moving igb_deliver_wake_packet() next to
> > igb_resume() inside the #ifdef.
> > 
> > The diff ends up looking a bit funky here.  It *looks* like
> > igb_suspend() is getting moved, but that's an artifact of how
> > 'diff' sees the changes.
> > 
> > Cc: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: intel-wired-lan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Seems to be fixed by the following commit in linux-next:
> 
> commit 000ba1f2ebf0d6f93b9ae6cfbe5417e66f1b8e8c
> Author: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> Date:   Thu Apr 27 21:09:52 2017 +0200
> 
>     igb: mark PM functions as __maybe_unused
> 
>     The new wake function is only used by the suspend/resume handlers
> that
>     are defined in inside of an #ifdef, which can cause this harmless
>     warning:
> 
>     drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c:7988:13: warning:
> 'igb_deliver_wake_packet' defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
> 
>     Removing the #ifdef, instead using a __maybe_unused annotation
>     simplifies the code and avoids the warning.
> 
>     Fixes: b90fa8763560 ("igb: Enable reading of wake up packet")
>     Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
>     Tested-by: Aaron Brown <aaron.f.brown@xxxxxxxxx>
>     Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@xxxxxxxxx>

Yeah, this is already fixed in my tree.  Dropping this patch.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part