Message ID | 20170627153508.1329697-1-arnd@arndb.de |
---|---|
State | Accepted |
Commit | 315e9c767d9a4668ad68cde1b57a14f916c90668 |
Delegated to: | Cyrille Pitchen |
Headers | show |
On 06/27/2017 05:34 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > The variable was already marked 'const' before the previous > patch, but the qualifier was in an unusual place, and now the > extra 'const' causes a harmless warning: > > drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c:1286:34: error: duplicate 'const' declaration specifier [-Werror=duplicate-decl-specifier] > > This removes the other 'const' instead. Isn't that const array const elements , thus two consts ? IMO the original code is correct. > Fixes: f993c123b461 ("mtd: spi-nor: cqspi: make of_device_ids const") > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > --- > drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c > index d315c326e72f..53c7d8e0327a 100644 > --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c > +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c > @@ -1283,7 +1283,7 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops cqspi__dev_pm_ops = { > #define CQSPI_DEV_PM_OPS NULL > #endif > > -static const struct of_device_id const cqspi_dt_ids[] = { > +static const struct of_device_id cqspi_dt_ids[] = { > {.compatible = "cdns,qspi-nor",}, > { /* end of table */ } > }; >
Le 27/06/2017 à 18:11, Marek Vasut a écrit : > On 06/27/2017 05:34 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> The variable was already marked 'const' before the previous >> patch, but the qualifier was in an unusual place, and now the >> extra 'const' causes a harmless warning: >> >> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c:1286:34: error: duplicate 'const' declaration specifier [-Werror=duplicate-decl-specifier] >> >> This removes the other 'const' instead. > > Isn't that const array const elements , thus two consts ? > IMO the original code is correct. Indeed the 2 'const' don't have the same meaning so the original code may be correct but with an array like cqspi_dt_ids[] we can't write "cqspi_dt_ids = (const struct of_device_id *)<right value>;" anyway. So I think the 2nd 'const' is useless here then if this patch removes a warning, let's apply it, right? > >> Fixes: f993c123b461 ("mtd: spi-nor: cqspi: make of_device_ids const") >> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> >> --- >> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c >> index d315c326e72f..53c7d8e0327a 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c >> @@ -1283,7 +1283,7 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops cqspi__dev_pm_ops = { >> #define CQSPI_DEV_PM_OPS NULL >> #endif >> >> -static const struct of_device_id const cqspi_dt_ids[] = { >> +static const struct of_device_id cqspi_dt_ids[] = { >> {.compatible = "cdns,qspi-nor",}, >> { /* end of table */ } >> }; >> > >
On 06/27/2017 09:48 PM, Cyrille Pitchen wrote: > Le 27/06/2017 à 18:11, Marek Vasut a écrit : >> On 06/27/2017 05:34 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>> The variable was already marked 'const' before the previous >>> patch, but the qualifier was in an unusual place, and now the >>> extra 'const' causes a harmless warning: >>> >>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c:1286:34: error: duplicate 'const' declaration specifier [-Werror=duplicate-decl-specifier] >>> >>> This removes the other 'const' instead. >> >> Isn't that const array const elements , thus two consts ? >> IMO the original code is correct. > > Indeed the 2 'const' don't have the same meaning so the original code > may be correct but with an array like cqspi_dt_ids[] we can't write > "cqspi_dt_ids = (const struct of_device_id *)<right value>;" anyway. Not sure I understand what you're trying to say here. > So I think the 2nd 'const' is useless here then if this patch removes a > warning, let's apply it, right? > >> >>> Fixes: f993c123b461 ("mtd: spi-nor: cqspi: make of_device_ids const") >>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> >>> --- >>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c >>> index d315c326e72f..53c7d8e0327a 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c >>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c >>> @@ -1283,7 +1283,7 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops cqspi__dev_pm_ops = { >>> #define CQSPI_DEV_PM_OPS NULL >>> #endif >>> >>> -static const struct of_device_id const cqspi_dt_ids[] = { >>> +static const struct of_device_id cqspi_dt_ids[] = { >>> {.compatible = "cdns,qspi-nor",}, >>> { /* end of table */ } >>> }; >>> >> >> >
Le 27/06/2017 à 21:51, Marek Vasut a écrit : > On 06/27/2017 09:48 PM, Cyrille Pitchen wrote: >> Le 27/06/2017 à 18:11, Marek Vasut a écrit : >>> On 06/27/2017 05:34 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>>> The variable was already marked 'const' before the previous >>>> patch, but the qualifier was in an unusual place, and now the >>>> extra 'const' causes a harmless warning: >>>> >>>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c:1286:34: error: duplicate 'const' declaration specifier [-Werror=duplicate-decl-specifier] >>>> >>>> This removes the other 'const' instead. >>> >>> Isn't that const array const elements , thus two consts ? >>> IMO the original code is correct. >> >> Indeed the 2 'const' don't have the same meaning so the original code >> may be correct but with an array like cqspi_dt_ids[] we can't write >> "cqspi_dt_ids = (const struct of_device_id *)<right value>;" anyway. > > Not sure I understand what you're trying to say here. > Just that once an array like cqspi_dt_ids[] has been defined, you can never assign it a new value later: cqspi_dt_ids = <new value>; /* that doesn't work */ For this specific point, an array behaves like a constant pointer (but otherwise I agree that arrays and constant pointers are not the same things). So I guess the 2nd 'const' could be considered as implicit :) >> So I think the 2nd 'const' is useless here then if this patch removes a >> warning, let's apply it, right? >> >>> >>>> Fixes: f993c123b461 ("mtd: spi-nor: cqspi: make of_device_ids const") >>>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c | 2 +- >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c >>>> index d315c326e72f..53c7d8e0327a 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c >>>> @@ -1283,7 +1283,7 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops cqspi__dev_pm_ops = { >>>> #define CQSPI_DEV_PM_OPS NULL >>>> #endif >>>> >>>> -static const struct of_device_id const cqspi_dt_ids[] = { >>>> +static const struct of_device_id cqspi_dt_ids[] = { >>>> {.compatible = "cdns,qspi-nor",}, >>>> { /* end of table */ } >>>> }; >>>> >>> >>> >> > >
On 06/27/2017 10:21 PM, Cyrille Pitchen wrote: > Le 27/06/2017 à 21:51, Marek Vasut a écrit : >> On 06/27/2017 09:48 PM, Cyrille Pitchen wrote: >>> Le 27/06/2017 à 18:11, Marek Vasut a écrit : >>>> On 06/27/2017 05:34 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>>>> The variable was already marked 'const' before the previous >>>>> patch, but the qualifier was in an unusual place, and now the >>>>> extra 'const' causes a harmless warning: >>>>> >>>>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c:1286:34: error: duplicate 'const' declaration specifier [-Werror=duplicate-decl-specifier] >>>>> >>>>> This removes the other 'const' instead. >>>> >>>> Isn't that const array const elements , thus two consts ? >>>> IMO the original code is correct. >>> >>> Indeed the 2 'const' don't have the same meaning so the original code >>> may be correct but with an array like cqspi_dt_ids[] we can't write >>> "cqspi_dt_ids = (const struct of_device_id *)<right value>;" anyway. >> >> Not sure I understand what you're trying to say here. >> > > Just that once an array like cqspi_dt_ids[] has been defined, you can > never assign it a new value later: > > cqspi_dt_ids = <new value>; /* that doesn't work */ > > For this specific point, an array behaves like a constant pointer (but > otherwise I agree that arrays and constant pointers are not the same > things). So I guess the 2nd 'const' could be considered as implicit :) I had to think about this a little and I think what you're getting at is something slightly different. IIUC if this was array of pointers (which it is not), you'd need this const Type *const name[] , but since this is array of Type , you can do with const Type name[] and the whole thing is implicitly const. But in that case: Acked-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> >>> So I think the 2nd 'const' is useless here then if this patch removes a >>> warning, let's apply it, right? >>> >>>> >>>>> Fixes: f993c123b461 ("mtd: spi-nor: cqspi: make of_device_ids const") >>>>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> >>>>> --- >>>>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c | 2 +- >>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c >>>>> index d315c326e72f..53c7d8e0327a 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c >>>>> @@ -1283,7 +1283,7 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops cqspi__dev_pm_ops = { >>>>> #define CQSPI_DEV_PM_OPS NULL >>>>> #endif >>>>> >>>>> -static const struct of_device_id const cqspi_dt_ids[] = { >>>>> +static const struct of_device_id cqspi_dt_ids[] = { >>>>> {.compatible = "cdns,qspi-nor",}, >>>>> { /* end of table */ } >>>>> }; >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >
Le 27/06/2017 à 22:53, Marek Vasut a écrit : > On 06/27/2017 10:21 PM, Cyrille Pitchen wrote: >> Le 27/06/2017 à 21:51, Marek Vasut a écrit : >>> On 06/27/2017 09:48 PM, Cyrille Pitchen wrote: >>>> Le 27/06/2017 à 18:11, Marek Vasut a écrit : >>>>> On 06/27/2017 05:34 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>>>>> The variable was already marked 'const' before the previous >>>>>> patch, but the qualifier was in an unusual place, and now the >>>>>> extra 'const' causes a harmless warning: >>>>>> >>>>>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c:1286:34: error: duplicate 'const' declaration specifier [-Werror=duplicate-decl-specifier] >>>>>> >>>>>> This removes the other 'const' instead. >>>>> >>>>> Isn't that const array const elements , thus two consts ? >>>>> IMO the original code is correct. >>>> >>>> Indeed the 2 'const' don't have the same meaning so the original code >>>> may be correct but with an array like cqspi_dt_ids[] we can't write >>>> "cqspi_dt_ids = (const struct of_device_id *)<right value>;" anyway. >>> >>> Not sure I understand what you're trying to say here. >>> >> >> Just that once an array like cqspi_dt_ids[] has been defined, you can >> never assign it a new value later: >> >> cqspi_dt_ids = <new value>; /* that doesn't work */ >> >> For this specific point, an array behaves like a constant pointer (but >> otherwise I agree that arrays and constant pointers are not the same >> things). So I guess the 2nd 'const' could be considered as implicit :) > > I had to think about this a little and I think what you're getting at is > something slightly different. Indeed, you're right, I've misunderstood the 2nd 'const' ;) So this time if I understand correctly, patch f993c123b461 was actually useless since the elements of the array were already constant before that patch, the syntax "Type const array[] = {...};" being equivalent to "const Type array[] = {...};" Anyway, the issue is fixed :) > > IIUC if this was array of pointers (which it is not), you'd need this > const Type *const name[] , but since this is array of Type , you can do > with const Type name[] and the whole thing is implicitly const. > > But in that case: > Acked-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com> > >>>> So I think the 2nd 'const' is useless here then if this patch removes a >>>> warning, let's apply it, right? >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Fixes: f993c123b461 ("mtd: spi-nor: cqspi: make of_device_ids const") >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c | 2 +- >>>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c >>>>>> index d315c326e72f..53c7d8e0327a 100644 >>>>>> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c >>>>>> @@ -1283,7 +1283,7 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops cqspi__dev_pm_ops = { >>>>>> #define CQSPI_DEV_PM_OPS NULL >>>>>> #endif >>>>>> >>>>>> -static const struct of_device_id const cqspi_dt_ids[] = { >>>>>> +static const struct of_device_id cqspi_dt_ids[] = { >>>>>> {.compatible = "cdns,qspi-nor",}, >>>>>> { /* end of table */ } >>>>>> }; >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > >
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c index d315c326e72f..53c7d8e0327a 100644 --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c @@ -1283,7 +1283,7 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops cqspi__dev_pm_ops = { #define CQSPI_DEV_PM_OPS NULL #endif -static const struct of_device_id const cqspi_dt_ids[] = { +static const struct of_device_id cqspi_dt_ids[] = { {.compatible = "cdns,qspi-nor",}, { /* end of table */ } };
The variable was already marked 'const' before the previous patch, but the qualifier was in an unusual place, and now the extra 'const' causes a harmless warning: drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c:1286:34: error: duplicate 'const' declaration specifier [-Werror=duplicate-decl-specifier] This removes the other 'const' instead. Fixes: f993c123b461 ("mtd: spi-nor: cqspi: make of_device_ids const") Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> --- drivers/mtd/spi-nor/cadence-quadspi.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)