| Message ID | 1316278139-28635-19-git-send-email-sjg@chromium.org |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Saturday, September 17, 2011 12:48:57 Simon Glass wrote: > There are a few variables set but not used - this marks these as unused > for the compiler. summary says "sandbox:" but i dont think this has anything to do with sandbox. you're just using a newer compiler. > --- a/common/cmd_mem.c > +++ b/common/cmd_mem.c > > - ulong addr, length, i, junk; > + ulong addr, length, i, junk __attribute__((unused)); this one is tricky as we just want to read the value from the volatile pointer. i'm guessing do "*longp++;" just adds a different warning ? > --- a/common/cmd_nvedit.c > +++ b/common/cmd_nvedit.c > > - int len; > + int len __attribute((unused)); this file though looks like we should just delete "len" -mike
Hi Mike, On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Saturday, September 17, 2011 12:48:57 Simon Glass wrote: >> There are a few variables set but not used - this marks these as unused >> for the compiler. > > summary says "sandbox:" but i dont think this has anything to do with sandbox. > you're just using a newer compiler. > >> --- a/common/cmd_mem.c >> +++ b/common/cmd_mem.c >> >> - ulong addr, length, i, junk; >> + ulong addr, length, i, junk __attribute__((unused)); > > this one is tricky as we just want to read the value from the volatile > pointer. i'm guessing do "*longp++;" just adds a different warning ? Isn't that a nop? Well I can just assign it to a different variable - I will use 'size' in my new patch set. > >> --- a/common/cmd_nvedit.c >> +++ b/common/cmd_nvedit.c >> >> - int len; >> + int len __attribute((unused)); > > this file though looks like we should just delete "len" Yes, done. I don't use lint anyway. Regards, Simon > -mike >
On Friday, September 23, 2011 12:01:46 Simon Glass wrote: > On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Saturday, September 17, 2011 12:48:57 Simon Glass wrote: > >> There are a few variables set but not used - this marks these as unused > >> for the compiler. > > > > summary says "sandbox:" but i dont think this has anything to do with > > sandbox. you're just using a newer compiler. > > > >> --- a/common/cmd_mem.c > >> +++ b/common/cmd_mem.c > >> > >> - ulong addr, length, i, junk; > >> + ulong addr, length, i, junk __attribute__((unused)); > > > > this one is tricky as we just want to read the value from the volatile > > pointer. i'm guessing do "*longp++;" just adds a different warning ? > > Isn't that a nop? if it's volatile, it shouldn't be > Well I can just assign it to a different variable - I will use 'size' > in my new patch set. Marek Vasut posted a patch which dropped the assignment and it seems to not add any warnings > >> --- a/common/cmd_nvedit.c > >> +++ b/common/cmd_nvedit.c > >> > >> - int len; > >> + int len __attribute((unused)); > > > > this file though looks like we should just delete "len" > > Yes, done. I don't use lint anyway. he also posted a fix for this :) -mike
Hi Mike, On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 9:49 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Friday, September 23, 2011 12:01:46 Simon Glass wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: >> > On Saturday, September 17, 2011 12:48:57 Simon Glass wrote: >> >> There are a few variables set but not used - this marks these as unused >> >> for the compiler. >> > >> > summary says "sandbox:" but i dont think this has anything to do with >> > sandbox. you're just using a newer compiler. >> > >> >> --- a/common/cmd_mem.c >> >> +++ b/common/cmd_mem.c >> >> >> >> - ulong addr, length, i, junk; >> >> + ulong addr, length, i, junk __attribute__((unused)); >> > >> > this one is tricky as we just want to read the value from the volatile >> > pointer. i'm guessing do "*longp++;" just adds a different warning ? >> >> Isn't that a nop? > > if it's volatile, it shouldn't be I missed that. checkpatch warns me so badly on volatile that I assumed we didn't use it :-) > >> Well I can just assign it to a different variable - I will use 'size' >> in my new patch set. > > Marek Vasut posted a patch which dropped the assignment and it seems to not > add any warnings Yes, just tried it and it works fine. Regards, Simon > >> >> --- a/common/cmd_nvedit.c >> >> +++ b/common/cmd_nvedit.c >> >> >> >> - int len; >> >> + int len __attribute((unused)); >> > >> > this file though looks like we should just delete "len" >> >> Yes, done. I don't use lint anyway. > > he also posted a fix for this :) > -mike >
diff --git a/common/cmd_mem.c b/common/cmd_mem.c index 4daa1b3..1168766 100644 --- a/common/cmd_mem.c +++ b/common/cmd_mem.c @@ -471,7 +471,7 @@ int do_mem_base (cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char * const argv[]) int do_mem_loop (cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char * const argv[]) { - ulong addr, length, i, junk; + ulong addr, length, i, junk __attribute__((unused)); int size; volatile uint *longp; volatile ushort *shortp; diff --git a/common/cmd_nvedit.c b/common/cmd_nvedit.c index e8b116d..cf6601d 100644 --- a/common/cmd_nvedit.c +++ b/common/cmd_nvedit.c @@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ int do_env_edit(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc, char * const argv[]) { char buffer[CONFIG_SYS_CBSIZE]; char *init_val; - int len; + int len __attribute((unused)); if (argc < 2) return cmd_usage(cmdtp);
There are a few variables set but not used - this marks these as unused for the compiler. Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg@chromium.org> --- common/cmd_mem.c | 2 +- common/cmd_nvedit.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)