diff mbox series

arm: smp: remove unused variable

Message ID 20201228120147.59387-1-wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com (mailing list archive)
State Mainlined
Commit a4b1b548104baf7059bb70ae9725417e96fc5996
Delegated to: Geert Uytterhoeven
Headers show
Series arm: smp: remove unused variable | expand

Commit Message

Wolfram Sang Dec. 28, 2020, 12:01 p.m. UTC
Not used anymore after refactoring:

arch/arm/kernel/smp.c: In function ‘show_ipi_list’:
arch/arm/kernel/smp.c:543:16: warning: variable ‘irq’ set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
  543 |   unsigned int irq;

Fixes: 88c637748e31 ("ARM: smp: Use irq_desc_kstat_cpu() in show_ipi_list()")
Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
---
 arch/arm/kernel/smp.c | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

Comments

Geert Uytterhoeven Jan. 26, 2021, 10:04 a.m. UTC | #1
Hi Wolfram,

On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 1:03 PM Wolfram Sang
<wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> wrote:
> Not used anymore after refactoring:
>
> arch/arm/kernel/smp.c: In function ‘show_ipi_list’:
> arch/arm/kernel/smp.c:543:16: warning: variable ‘irq’ set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
>   543 |   unsigned int irq;
>
> Fixes: 88c637748e31 ("ARM: smp: Use irq_desc_kstat_cpu() in show_ipi_list()")
> Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>

Known issue since Dec 15, and still not fixed...

Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert
Russell King - ARM Linux admin Jan. 26, 2021, 10:41 a.m. UTC | #2
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 11:04:47AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Wolfram,
> 
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 1:03 PM Wolfram Sang
> <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> wrote:
> > Not used anymore after refactoring:
> >
> > arch/arm/kernel/smp.c: In function ‘show_ipi_list’:
> > arch/arm/kernel/smp.c:543:16: warning: variable ‘irq’ set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
> >   543 |   unsigned int irq;
> >
> > Fixes: 88c637748e31 ("ARM: smp: Use irq_desc_kstat_cpu() in show_ipi_list()")
> > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
> > Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> > Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> 
> Known issue since Dec 15, and still not fixed...
> 
> Reviewed-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>

Those who cause breakage really should be the ones to look at patches
that fix their breakage.

The way patches get applied is if they end up in my patch system... if
they don't make it there, they don't get applied.
Wolfram Sang Jan. 26, 2021, 1:02 p.m. UTC | #3
Hi Russell,

> Those who cause breakage really should be the ones to look at patches
> that fix their breakage.

Does it mean you want an explicit ack from Thomas or that it should go
via his tree?

> The way patches get applied is if they end up in my patch system... if
> they don't make it there, they don't get applied.

The patch itself is here:

https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/viewpatch.php?id=9047/1

All the best,

   Wolfram
Russell King - ARM Linux admin Jan. 26, 2021, 1:40 p.m. UTC | #4
On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 02:02:40PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Hi Russell,
> 
> > Those who cause breakage really should be the ones to look at patches
> > that fix their breakage.
> 
> Does it mean you want an explicit ack from Thomas or that it should go
> via his tree?

What I'm saying is... don't expect me to always review patches that
are for fixing code that other people have contributed - I wish those
who introduce regressions would stick around and attend to breakage
that they cause, instead of hoping that someone else will do that
for them. It's a reasonable ask.

> > The way patches get applied is if they end up in my patch system... if
> > they don't make it there, they don't get applied.
> 
> The patch itself is here:
> 
> https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/viewpatch.php?id=9047/1

Thanks - I'll get around to it in due course. Since I'm no longer
supported as 32-bit ARM maintainer, I only apply patches once or maybe
twice per kernel release. Quite how long this will be sustainable for,
I've no idea (it depends whether I get any actual paying work, and
how much.)
Wolfram Sang Jan. 26, 2021, 1:52 p.m. UTC | #5
> What I'm saying is... don't expect me to always review patches that
> are for fixing code that other people have contributed - I wish those
> who introduce regressions would stick around and attend to breakage
> that they cause, instead of hoping that someone else will do that
> for them. It's a reasonable ask.

Yes, I am much with you here.

> Thanks - I'll get around to it in due course. Since I'm no longer
> supported as 32-bit ARM maintainer, I only apply patches once or maybe
> twice per kernel release. Quite how long this will be sustainable for,
> I've no idea (it depends whether I get any actual paying work, and
> how much.)

I didn't know that, thanks for the heads up. I understand that problem
and hope there will be income for the work you do.
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c b/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c
index 5c48eb4fd0e5..74679240a9d8 100644
--- a/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c
+++ b/arch/arm/kernel/smp.c
@@ -540,12 +540,9 @@  void show_ipi_list(struct seq_file *p, int prec)
 	unsigned int cpu, i;
 
 	for (i = 0; i < NR_IPI; i++) {
-		unsigned int irq;
-
 		if (!ipi_desc[i])
 			continue;
 
-		irq = irq_desc_get_irq(ipi_desc[i]);
 		seq_printf(p, "%*s%u: ", prec - 1, "IPI", i);
 
 		for_each_online_cpu(cpu)