Re: [PATCH] nvmem: hide unused nvmem_find_cell_by_index function

From: Bartosz Golaszewski
Date: Tue Oct 02 2018 - 17:24:12 EST


wt., 2 paÅ 2018 o 23:11 Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> napisaÅ(a):
>
> nvmem_find_cell_by_index() is only called from inside an #ifdef,
> so we get a build warning without CONFIG_OF:
>
> drivers/nvmem/core.c:496:1: error: 'nvmem_find_cell_by_index' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
>
> Move it into the same #ifdef as the caller to avoid the warning.
>
> Fixes: e888d445ac33 ("nvmem: resolve cells from DT at registration time")
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/nvmem/core.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/core.c b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> index cc815bb2eebd..f99fb74a646e 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
> @@ -492,22 +492,6 @@ static int nvmem_add_cells_from_table(struct nvmem_device *nvmem)
> return rval;
> }
>
> -static struct nvmem_cell *
> -nvmem_find_cell_by_index(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, int index)
> -{
> - struct nvmem_cell *cell = NULL;
> - int i = 0;
> -
> - mutex_lock(&nvmem_mutex);
> - list_for_each_entry(cell, &nvmem->cells, node) {
> - if (index == i++)
> - break;
> - }
> - mutex_unlock(&nvmem_mutex);
> -
> - return cell;
> -}
> -
> static struct nvmem_cell *
> nvmem_find_cell_by_name(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, const char *cell_id)
> {
> @@ -972,6 +956,22 @@ nvmem_cell_get_from_lookup(struct device *dev, const char *con_id)
> }
>
> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)
> +static struct nvmem_cell *
> +nvmem_find_cell_by_index(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, int index)
> +{
> + struct nvmem_cell *cell = NULL;
> + int i = 0;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&nvmem_mutex);
> + list_for_each_entry(cell, &nvmem->cells, node) {
> + if (index == i++)
> + break;
> + }
> + mutex_unlock(&nvmem_mutex);
> +
> + return cell;
> +}
> +
> /**
> * of_nvmem_cell_get() - Get a nvmem cell from given device node and cell id
> *
> --
> 2.18.0
>

Srinivas,

I think this is even better than __maybe_unused so if you're fine I
won't resend my patch tomorrow.

Thanks,
Bart