remove warning from drivers/net/hp100.c (240-test12-pre7)
PATCH 1/1 remove warning from drivers/net/hp100.c (240-test12-pre7)
Hi.
The following patch removes a 'defined but not used' warning from drivers/ new/hp100.c when compiling without CONFIG_PCI (240t12p3). It should apply cleanly.
drivers/net/hp100.c +2 -0
@@ -265,12 +265,14 @@#define HP100_EISA_IDS_SIZE (sizeof(hp100_eisa_ids)/sizeof(struct hp100_eisa_id)) +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI static struct hp100_pci_id hp100_pci_ids[] = { {PCI_VENDOR_ID_HP ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_HP_J2585A }, {PCI_VENDOR_ID_HP ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_HP_J2585B }, {PCI_VENDOR_ID_COMPEX ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_COMPEX_ENET100VG4 }, {PCI_VENDOR_ID_COMPEX2 ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_COMPEX2_100VG } }; +#endif #define HP100_PCI_IDS_SIZE (sizeof(hp100_pci_ids)/sizeof(struct hp100_pci_id))
Signature · 9 lines
Regards,
Rasmus([email protected])
We're going to turn this team around 360 degrees.
-Jason Kidd, upon his drafting to the Dallas Mavericks
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/Hi!
Quoted 3 lines
The following patch removes a 'defined but not used' warning from
drivers/new/hp100.cwhen compiling withoutCONFIG_PCI(240t12p3). It should apply cleanly.
I'd say that warning is more acceptable than #ifdef... In cases where warnings can be eliminating without ifdefs, that's okay, but this...
Pavel
Quoted 16 lines
drivers/net/hp100.c +2
-0@@ -265,12 +265,14 @@#define HP100_EISA_IDS_SIZE (sizeof(hp100_eisa_ids)/sizeof(struct hp100_eisa_id)) +#ifdef CONFIG_PCI static struct hp100_pci_id hp100_pci_ids[] = { {PCI_VENDOR_ID_HP ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_HP_J2585A }, {PCI_VENDOR_ID_HP ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_HP_J2585B }, {PCI_VENDOR_ID_COMPEX ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_COMPEX_ENET100VG4 }, {PCI_VENDOR_ID_COMPEX2 ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_COMPEX2_100VG } }; +#endif #define HP100_PCI_IDS_SIZE (sizeof(hp100_pci_ids)/sizeof(struct hp100_pci_id))
Signature · 6 lines
I'm [email protected]. "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care." Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at [email protected] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Pavel Machek]
Quoted 2 lines
I'd say that warning is more acceptable than #ifdef... In cases where warnings can be eliminating without ifdefs, that's okay, but this...
In this case it is dead weight in the object file -- and for machines that can least afford it (CONFIG_PCI=n is mostly for the low end, right?).
Peter
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Quoted 8 lines · Peter Samuelson
[Pavel Machek]
Quoted 2 lines
I'd say that warning is more acceptable than #ifdef... In cases where warnings can be eliminating without ifdefs, that's okay, but this...
In this case it is dead weight in the object file -- and for machines that can least afford it (
CONFIG_PCI=nis mostly for the low end, right?).
How about this patch? It moves the offending struct to the __init function where it is used and inside an existing #ifdef CONFIG_PCI. This would be up to the maintainer but since this is the only place the struct is used I think it is acceptable to move it from the top of the file.
Comments?
drivers/net/hp100.c +7 -7
@@ -265,13 +265,6 @@#define HP100_EISA_IDS_SIZE (sizeof(hp100_eisa_ids)/sizeof(struct hp100_eisa_id)) -static struct hp100_pci_id hp100_pci_ids[] = { - {PCI_VENDOR_ID_HP ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_HP_J2585A }, - {PCI_VENDOR_ID_HP ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_HP_J2585B }, - {PCI_VENDOR_ID_COMPEX ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_COMPEX_ENET100VG4 }, - {PCI_VENDOR_ID_COMPEX2 ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_COMPEX2_100VG } -}; -#define HP100_PCI_IDS_SIZE (sizeof(hp100_pci_ids)/sizeof(struct hp100_pci_id))static int hp100_rx_ratio =HP100_DEFAULT_RX_RATIO ;
@@ -335,6 +328,13 @@int ioaddr =0 ;#ifdef CONFIG_PCI int pci_start_index =0 ; + +static struct hp100_pci_id hp100_pci_ids[] = { + {PCI_VENDOR_ID_HP ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_HP_J2585A }, + {PCI_VENDOR_ID_HP ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_HP_J2585B }, + {PCI_VENDOR_ID_COMPEX ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_COMPEX_ENET100VG4 }, + {PCI_VENDOR_ID_COMPEX2 ,PCI_DEVICE_ID_COMPEX2_100VG } + };#endif #ifdef HP100_DEBUG_B
Signature · 9 lines
Regards,
Rasmus([email protected])
It's a recession when your neighbour loses his job; it's a depression
when you lose yours. -- Harry S. Truman
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/[Rasmus Andersen]
Quoted 2 lines
How about this patch? It moves the offending struct to the
__initfunction where it is used and inside an existing #ifdefCONFIG_PCI.
Hmmmm, if you're messing around with the pci device table, why not just convert it to use new-style PCI init? This is fairly easy to do (I did one driver myself, and that *proves* it's easy). The main points:
1) convert the device table to a 'struct pci_device_id' and reference this struct with a call to MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(my_struct)
2) create a 'struct pci_driver' function table, rearranging the driver housekeeping functions to fit this table
3) convert your PCI probe loop inn your init function to use pci_module_init(my_pci_driver_struct), which does the looping for you
Thanks to Adam Richter's hard work, there are lots of examples of drivers that have already been converted to this scheme. I don't remember if Adam purposely skipped hp100.c or if it was an oversight.
Peter
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Quoted 8 lines · Peter Samuelson
[Rasmus Andersen]
Quoted 2 lines
How about this patch? It moves the offending struct to the
__initfunction where it is used and inside an existing #ifdefCONFIG_PCI.Hmmmm, if you're messing around with the pci device table, why not just convert it to use new-style PCI init? This is fairly easy to do (I did one driver myself, and that *proves* it's easy). The main points:
I was looking into that regarding another driver anyway, so I'll try my hand at that. Expect some b0rken patches soon :)
Regards,
Rasmus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/