2005-01-07 21:14:51

by Geert Uytterhoeven

Subject: [PATCH 167] Kill unused variables in the net code

2.4.28-rc2 introduced a warning in the net code on non-SMP:

net/core/neighbour.c:1809: warning: unused variable `tbl'

The following patch fixes this.

Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]>

--- linux-2.4.29-rc1/include/linux/spinlock.h 2004-04-27 17:22:10.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-m68k-2.4.29-rc1/include/linux/spinlock.h 2005-01-07 21:51:28.000000000 +0100
@@ -147,7 +147,7 @@

#define rwlock_init(lock) do { } while(0)
#define read_lock(lock) (void)(lock) /* Not "unused variable". */
-#define read_unlock(lock) do { } while(0)
+#define read_unlock(lock) (void)(lock) /* Not "unused variable". */
#define write_lock(lock) (void)(lock) /* Not "unused variable". */
#define write_unlock(lock) do { } while(0)


Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds

2005-01-07 21:43:23

by linux-os

Subject: Re: [PATCH 167] Kill unused variables in the net code

On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:

> 2.4.28-rc2 introduced a warning in the net code on non-SMP:
>
> net/core/neighbour.c:1809: warning: unused variable `tbl'
>
> The following patch fixes this.
>
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]>
>
> --- linux-2.4.29-rc1/include/linux/spinlock.h 2004-04-27 17:22:10.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-m68k-2.4.29-rc1/include/linux/spinlock.h 2005-01-07 21:51:28.000000000 +0100
> @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@
>
> #define rwlock_init(lock) do { } while(0)
> #define read_lock(lock) (void)(lock) /* Not "unused variable". */
> -#define read_unlock(lock) do { } while(0)
> +#define read_unlock(lock) (void)(lock) /* Not "unused variable". */
> #define write_lock(lock) (void)(lock) /* Not "unused variable". */
> #define write_unlock(lock) do { } while(0)
>
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert


But don't all you need to do is:

#define read_unlock(x)





Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.6.10 on an i686 machine (5537.79 BogoMips).
Notice : All mail here is now cached for review by Dictator Bush.
98.36% of all statistics are fiction.

2005-01-07 22:29:39

by Geert Uytterhoeven

Subject: Re: [PATCH 167] Kill unused variables in the net code

On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, linux-os wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > 2.4.28-rc2 introduced a warning in the net code on non-SMP:
> >
> > net/core/neighbour.c:1809: warning: unused variable `tbl'
> >
> > The following patch fixes this.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <[email protected]>
> >
> > --- linux-2.4.29-rc1/include/linux/spinlock.h 2004-04-27 17:22:10.000000000
> > +0200
> > +++ linux-m68k-2.4.29-rc1/include/linux/spinlock.h 2005-01-07
> > 21:51:28.000000000 +0100
> > @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@
> >
> > #define rwlock_init(lock) do { } while(0)
> > #define read_lock(lock) (void)(lock) /* Not "unused variable". */
> > -#define read_unlock(lock) do { } while(0)
> > +#define read_unlock(lock) (void)(lock) /* Not "unused variable". */
> > #define write_lock(lock) (void)(lock) /* Not "unused variable". */
> > #define write_unlock(lock) do { } while(0)
> But don't all you need to do is:
>
> #define read_unlock(x)

No, since the `x' may refer to a variable that's further unused (cfr.
net/core/neighbour.c:1809).

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds

2005-01-07 22:56:40

by Sam Ravnborg

Subject: Re: [PATCH 167] Kill unused variables in the net code

On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 04:38:36PM -0500, linux-os wrote:
> >-#define read_unlock(lock) do { } while(0)
> >+#define read_unlock(lock) (void)(lock) /* Not "unused variable". */
>
> But don't all you need to do is:
>
> #define read_unlock(x)

Then tbl will still be unused - and compiler will emit warning.

Sam