2021-04-09 09:24:07

by Jiapeng Chong

Subject: [PATCH] usb: typec: tcpm: remove useless variable

Fix the following gcc warning:

drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c:2107:39: warning: ‘tcpm_altmode_ops’
defined but not used [-Wunused-const-variable=].

Reported-by: Abaci Robot <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jiapeng Chong <[email protected]>
---
drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c | 6 ------
1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c
index ce7af39..4585785 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c
@@ -2104,12 +2104,6 @@ static int tcpm_altmode_vdm(struct typec_altmode *altmode,
return 0;
}

-static const struct typec_altmode_ops tcpm_altmode_ops = {
- .enter = tcpm_altmode_enter,
- .exit = tcpm_altmode_exit,
- .vdm = tcpm_altmode_vdm,
-};
-
/*
* PD (data, control) command handling functions
*/
--
1.8.3.1

2021-04-09 09:36:37

by Heikki Krogerus

Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: typec: tcpm: remove useless variable

On Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 05:22:16PM +0800, Jiapeng Chong wrote:
> Fix the following gcc warning:
>
> drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c:2107:39: warning: ‘tcpm_altmode_ops’
> defined but not used [-Wunused-const-variable=].
>
> Reported-by: Abaci Robot <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Jiapeng Chong <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c | 6 ------
> 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c
> index ce7af39..4585785 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c
> @@ -2104,12 +2104,6 @@ static int tcpm_altmode_vdm(struct typec_altmode *altmode,
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static const struct typec_altmode_ops tcpm_altmode_ops = {
> - .enter = tcpm_altmode_enter,
> - .exit = tcpm_altmode_exit,
> - .vdm = tcpm_altmode_vdm,
> -};

You remove that but leave the functions. That should create even more
warnings for you, because now there are no users for those functions.

There is another, more complete patch for this, but I don't think we
should take either of these now. We about to get a user for
tcpm_altmode_ops.

Br,

--
heikki