Feedback-ID: i56a14606:Fastmail
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.9.0-alpha0-156-g081acc5ed5-fm-20230206.001-g081acc5e
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <9e066063-a2e7-494a-9784-2fc37ef77094@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <f38d6b22-f846-5637-d58b-2d8862bc6840@gmail.com>
References: <20230217095650.2305559-1-arnd@kernel.org>
 <f38d6b22-f846-5637-d58b-2d8862bc6840@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 17 Feb 2023 17:19:26 +0100
From:   "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>
To:     "Edward Cree" <ecree.xilinx@gmail.com>,
        "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@kernel.org>,
        "Martin Habets" <habetsm.xilinx@gmail.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        "Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@google.com>,
        "Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
        "Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        "Alejandro Lucero" <alejandro.lucero-palau@amd.com>
Cc:     "Jonathan Cooper" <jonathan.s.cooper@amd.com>,
        Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        "Leon Romanovsky" <leon@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sfc: use IS_ENABLED() checks for CONFIG_SFC_SRIOV
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 17, 2023, at 17:13, Edward Cree wrote:
> On 17/02/2023 09:56, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>> 
>> One local variable has become unused after a recent change:
>> 
>> drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/ef100_nic.c: In function 'ef100_probe_netdev_pf':
>> drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/ef100_nic.c:1155:21: error: unused variable 'net_dev' [-Werror=unused-variable]
>>   struct net_device *net_dev = efx->net_dev;
>>                      ^~~~~~~
>> 
>> The variable is still used in an #ifdef. Replace the #ifdef with
>> an if(IS_ENABLED()) check that lets the compiler see where it is
>> used, rather than adding another #ifdef.
>
> So we've had Leon telling us[1] to use __maybe_unused, and you're
>  saying to use IS_ENABLED() instead.  Which is right?
> (And does it make any difference to build time?  I'm assuming the
>  compiler is smart enough that this change doesn't affect text
>  size...?)
> -ed

Both are correct, but I prefer the IS_ENABLED() change because it
improves build coverage. The resulting object code should be the
same, as the dead-code-elimination in gcc takes care of removing
it the same way.

If you use the __maybe_uninitialized annotation, you still need
an extra fix to initialize the ef100_probe_netdev_pf() return
code.

      Arnd