Reduce noise when compiling W=1.
All the variables are unused.
The functions are not called outside of the file so static
is preferred.
Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <[email protected]>
---
John, can you please verify that these gen_stats accesses
are unnecessary? I believe the compiler can elide them in
any case, but I'm not sure what you intended here.
net/core/dev.c | 4 ++--
net/core/gen_stats.c | 4 ----
net/core/rtnetlink.c | 3 +--
3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
index 1a90530..2049a17 100644
--- a/net/core/dev.c
+++ b/net/core/dev.c
@@ -5239,7 +5239,7 @@ void netdev_upper_dev_unlink(struct net_device *dev,
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(netdev_upper_dev_unlink);
-void netdev_adjacent_add_links(struct net_device *dev)
+static void netdev_adjacent_add_links(struct net_device *dev)
{
struct netdev_adjacent *iter;
@@ -5264,7 +5264,7 @@ void netdev_adjacent_add_links(struct net_device *dev)
}
}
-void netdev_adjacent_del_links(struct net_device *dev)
+static void netdev_adjacent_del_links(struct net_device *dev)
{
struct netdev_adjacent *iter;
diff --git a/net/core/gen_stats.c b/net/core/gen_stats.c
index 14681b9..01be9cf 100644
--- a/net/core/gen_stats.c
+++ b/net/core/gen_stats.c
@@ -106,13 +106,9 @@ __gnet_stats_copy_basic_cpu(struct gnet_stats_basic_packed *bstats,
for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
struct gnet_stats_basic_cpu *bcpu = per_cpu_ptr(cpu, i);
unsigned int start;
- __u64 bytes;
- __u32 packets;
do {
start = u64_stats_fetch_begin_irq(&bcpu->syncp);
- bytes = bcpu->bstats.bytes;
- packets = bcpu->bstats.packets;
} while (u64_stats_fetch_retry_irq(&bcpu->syncp, start));
bstats->bytes += bcpu->bstats.bytes;
diff --git a/net/core/rtnetlink.c b/net/core/rtnetlink.c
index a688268..c2fe350 100644
--- a/net/core/rtnetlink.c
+++ b/net/core/rtnetlink.c
@@ -2917,7 +2917,7 @@ static int rtnetlink_rcv_msg(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh)
{
struct net *net = sock_net(skb->sk);
rtnl_doit_func doit;
- int sz_idx, kind;
+ int kind;
int family;
int type;
int err;
@@ -2933,7 +2933,6 @@ static int rtnetlink_rcv_msg(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh)
return 0;
family = ((struct rtgenmsg *)nlmsg_data(nlh))->rtgen_family;
- sz_idx = type>>2;
kind = type&3;
if (kind != 2 && !netlink_net_capable(skb, CAP_NET_ADMIN))
From: Joe Perches <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 14:51:38 -0700
> Reduce noise when compiling W=1.
>
> All the variables are unused.
> The functions are not called outside of the file so static
> is preferred.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> John, can you please verify that these gen_stats accesses
> are unnecessary? I believe the compiler can elide them in
> any case, but I'm not sure what you intended here.
BTW, this patch reminds me that if people think there are
subdirectories where we can turn on things like -Werror in the
networking I would be very happy to apply such patches.
Things like arch/sparc has had this for years, I even forget when I
added it. :-)
Things like net/core/ for example should be doable for sure.
On Mon, 2014-10-06 at 14:51 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> Reduce noise when compiling W=1.
>
> All the variables are unused.
> The functions are not called outside of the file so static
> is preferred.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> John, can you please verify that these gen_stats accesses
> are unnecessary? I believe the compiler can elide them in
> any case, but I'm not sure what you intended here.
...
> diff --git a/net/core/gen_stats.c b/net/core/gen_stats.c
> index 14681b9..01be9cf 100644
> --- a/net/core/gen_stats.c
> +++ b/net/core/gen_stats.c
> @@ -106,13 +106,9 @@ __gnet_stats_copy_basic_cpu(struct gnet_stats_basic_packed *bstats,
> for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
> struct gnet_stats_basic_cpu *bcpu = per_cpu_ptr(cpu, i);
> unsigned int start;
> - __u64 bytes;
> - __u32 packets;
>
> do {
> start = u64_stats_fetch_begin_irq(&bcpu->syncp);
> - bytes = bcpu->bstats.bytes;
> - packets = bcpu->bstats.packets;
> } while (u64_stats_fetch_retry_irq(&bcpu->syncp, start));
>
Well... Please fix the bug for real.
> bstats->bytes += bcpu->bstats.bytes;
->
bstats->bytes += bytes;
bstats->packets += packets;
On Mon, 2014-10-06 at 17:56 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Joe Perches <[email protected]>
> Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 14:51:38 -0700
>
> > Reduce noise when compiling W=1.
[]
> BTW, this patch reminds me that if people think there are
> subdirectories where we can turn on things like -Werror in the
> networking I would be very happy to apply such patches.
[]
> Things like net/core/ for example should be doable for sure.
I don't have any significant opposition to -Werror, but
I think there are real arguments _against_ using -Werror.
I think the primary one is new compiler versions have a
tendency to add new warnings for various things that can
unnecessarily and unpredictably break the build.
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Joe Perches <[email protected]> wrote:
> John, can you please verify that these gen_stats accesses
> are unnecessary? I believe the compiler can elide them in
> any case, but I'm not sure what you intended here.
>
> net/core/dev.c | 4 ++--
> net/core/gen_stats.c | 4 ----
> net/core/rtnetlink.c | 3 +--
> 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
You need to split this patch.
> diff --git a/net/core/gen_stats.c b/net/core/gen_stats.c
> index 14681b9..01be9cf 100644
> --- a/net/core/gen_stats.c
> +++ b/net/core/gen_stats.c
> @@ -106,13 +106,9 @@ __gnet_stats_copy_basic_cpu(struct gnet_stats_basic_packed *bstats,
> for_each_possible_cpu(i) {
> struct gnet_stats_basic_cpu *bcpu = per_cpu_ptr(cpu, i);
> unsigned int start;
> - __u64 bytes;
> - __u32 packets;
>
> do {
> start = u64_stats_fetch_begin_irq(&bcpu->syncp);
> - bytes = bcpu->bstats.bytes;
> - packets = bcpu->bstats.packets;
> } while (u64_stats_fetch_retry_irq(&bcpu->syncp, start));
Looks like we really need them:
diff --git a/net/core/gen_stats.c b/net/core/gen_stats.c
index 14681b9..7948ecf 100644
--- a/net/core/gen_stats.c
+++ b/net/core/gen_stats.c
@@ -115,8 +115,8 @@ __gnet_stats_copy_basic_cpu(struct
gnet_stats_basic_packed *bstats,
packets = bcpu->bstats.packets;
} while (u64_stats_fetch_retry_irq(&bcpu->syncp, start));
- bstats->bytes += bcpu->bstats.bytes;
- bstats->packets += bcpu->bstats.packets;
+ bstats->bytes += bytes;
+ bstats->packets += packets;
}
}
From: Joe Perches <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 15:04:24 -0700
> On Mon, 2014-10-06 at 17:56 -0400, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Joe Perches <[email protected]>
>> Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 14:51:38 -0700
>>
>> > Reduce noise when compiling W=1.
> []
>> BTW, this patch reminds me that if people think there are
>> subdirectories where we can turn on things like -Werror in the
>> networking I would be very happy to apply such patches.
> []
>> Things like net/core/ for example should be doable for sure.
>
> I don't have any significant opposition to -Werror, but
> I think there are real arguments _against_ using -Werror.
>
> I think the primary one is new compiler versions have a
> tendency to add new warnings for various things that can
> unnecessarily and unpredictably break the build.
My experience over at least a decade with arch/sparc doesn't match
your claims.
On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 03:04:24PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-10-06 at 17:56 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Joe Perches <[email protected]>
> > Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 14:51:38 -0700
> >
> > > Reduce noise when compiling W=1.
> []
> > BTW, this patch reminds me that if people think there are
> > subdirectories where we can turn on things like -Werror in the
> > networking I would be very happy to apply such patches.
> []
> > Things like net/core/ for example should be doable for sure.
>
> I don't have any significant opposition to -Werror, but
> I think there are real arguments _against_ using -Werror.
>
> I think the primary one is new compiler versions have a
> tendency to add new warnings for various things that can
> unnecessarily and unpredictably break the build.
-Werror is a bad idea, even on a per-directory basis. However,
-Werror=specific-warning is a great idea. We should add that for
high-value warnings that have been entirely eliminated in a directory.
- Josh Triplett