The MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE() macro already checks for MODULE defined,
so the extra check here is not necessary.
Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt <[email protected]>
---
drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c | 2 --
1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c b/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c
index b09c39a..b674c2f 100644
--- a/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c
+++ b/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c
@@ -482,14 +482,12 @@ static int i5k_channel_probe(u16 *amb_present, unsigned long dev_id)
{ 0, 0 }
};
-#ifdef MODULE
static const struct pci_device_id i5k_amb_ids[] = {
{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_5000_ERR) },
{ PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_5400_ERR) },
{ 0, }
};
MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(pci, i5k_amb_ids);
-#endif
static int i5k_amb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
--
1.9.1
On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 04:01:40PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
> The MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE() macro already checks for MODULE defined,
> so the extra check here is not necessary.
>
> Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c | 2 --
> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c b/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c
> index b09c39a..b674c2f 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c
> @@ -482,14 +482,12 @@ static int i5k_channel_probe(u16 *amb_present, unsigned long dev_id)
> { 0, 0 }
> };
>
> -#ifdef MODULE
> static const struct pci_device_id i5k_amb_ids[] = {
> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_5000_ERR) },
> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_5400_ERR) },
> { 0, }
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(pci, i5k_amb_ids);
> -#endif
>
I'd rather know what this table is used for in the first place.
Guenter
> static int i5k_amb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> --
> 1.9.1
>
On 01.06.19 22:49, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 04:01:40PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
>> The MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE() macro already checks for MODULE defined,
>> so the extra check here is not necessary.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c | 2 --
>> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c b/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c
>> index b09c39a..b674c2f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c
>> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c
>> @@ -482,14 +482,12 @@ static int i5k_channel_probe(u16 *amb_present, unsigned long dev_id)
>> { 0, 0 }
>> };
>>
>> -#ifdef MODULE
>> static const struct pci_device_id i5k_amb_ids[] = {
>> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_5000_ERR) },
>> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_5400_ERR) },
>> { 0, }
>> };
>> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(pci, i5k_amb_ids);
>> -#endif
>>
>
> I'd rather know what this table is used for in the first place.
Seems it's really just used for the module loader, while actual probing
is using a different table. IMHO, the worst thing my patch could do is
introducing a warning on unused variable (IMHO shouldn't happen when
it's static const).
I've just rewritten it to move everything into i5k_amb_ids ... just need
to run build tests on it (unfortunately can't run-test, as I don't have
that device).
--mtx
--
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
[email protected] -- +49-151-27565287
On 6/5/19 4:59 PM, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
> On 01.06.19 22:49, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 01, 2019 at 04:01:40PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
>>> The MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE() macro already checks for MODULE defined,
>>> so the extra check here is not necessary.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c | 2 --
>>> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c b/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c
>>> index b09c39a..b674c2f 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/i5k_amb.c
>>> @@ -482,14 +482,12 @@ static int i5k_channel_probe(u16 *amb_present, unsigned long dev_id)
>>> { 0, 0 }
>>> };
>>> -#ifdef MODULE
>>> static const struct pci_device_id i5k_amb_ids[] = {
>>> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_5000_ERR) },
>>> { PCI_DEVICE(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_5400_ERR) },
>>> { 0, }
>>> };
>>> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(pci, i5k_amb_ids);
>>> -#endif
>>
>> I'd rather know what this table is used for in the first place.
>
> Seems it's really just used for the module loader, while actual probing
> is using a different table. IMHO, the worst thing my patch could do is
> introducing a warning on unused variable (IMHO shouldn't happen when
> it's static const).
>
You are wrong. You'll need __maybe_unused qualifiers for those variables
to avoid the warning.
Guenter
> I've just rewritten it to move everything into i5k_amb_ids ... just need
> to run build tests on it (unfortunately can't run-test, as I don't have
> that device).
>
>
> --mtx
>