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 <[email protected]>
---
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 */ }
};
--
2.9.0
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 <[email protected]>
> ---
> 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 */ }
> };
>
--
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
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 <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> 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 */ }
>>> };
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
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 <[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> 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 <[email protected]>
>>> 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 <[email protected]>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> 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 */ }
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
--
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
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 <[email protected]>
>
>>>> 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 <[email protected]>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> 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 <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> 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 */ }
>> };
>>
>
>