From: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>
When CONFIG_OF is disabled, there is no reference to this variable:
drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c:1655:34: error: unused variable 'qcom_scm_qseecom_allowlist' [-Werror,-Wunused-const-variable]
static const struct of_device_id qcom_scm_qseecom_allowlist[] = {
Mark it as __maybe_unused to hide this warning.
Fixes: 00b1248606ba ("firmware: qcom_scm: Add support for Qualcomm Secure Execution Environment SCM interface")
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>
---
drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c b/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c
index 49ddbcab0680..81c15aeff934 100644
--- a/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c
+++ b/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c
@@ -1652,7 +1652,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(qcom_scm_qseecom_app_send);
* We do not yet support re-entrant calls via the qseecom interface. To prevent
+ any potential issues with this, only allow validated machines for now.
*/
-static const struct of_device_id qcom_scm_qseecom_allowlist[] = {
+static const struct of_device_id qcom_scm_qseecom_allowlist[] __maybe_unused = {
{ .compatible = "lenovo,thinkpad-x13s", },
{ }
};
--
2.39.2
On 03/04/2024 10:06, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>
>
> When CONFIG_OF is disabled, there is no reference to this variable:
>
> drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c:1655:34: error: unused variable 'qcom_scm_qseecom_allowlist' [-Werror,-Wunused-const-variable]
> static const struct of_device_id qcom_scm_qseecom_allowlist[] = {
>
> Mark it as __maybe_unused to hide this warning.
>
> Fixes: 00b1248606ba ("firmware: qcom_scm: Add support for Qualcomm Secure Execution Environment SCM interface")
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]>
> ---
I already fixed this and have an Ack:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
Can anyone pick up that one? Why these trivial and obvious fixes take so
much effort...
Just like Arnd, I keep fixing many little things which takes
considerable amount of time. This is not a problem. You know what is the
problem? Chasing maintainers, keeping track of my own patches, resending
and pinging. All this takes considerable amount of time which is a
*wasted* time which I could spend on developing new code. Then finding
out that Arnd spent his time to fix this again!
Same simple issue being fixed by two people. Considering effort spent on
tracking/resending patches (or even writing this stupid rant), simple
patch which should take 1h of developers time takes 3 or four times more!
Best regards,
Krzysztof