2012-09-21 10:02:04

by Paul Bolle

Subject: [PATCH] ipw2x00: silence GCC warning for unused variable 'dev'

Building the libipw component without CONFIG_LIBIPW_DEBUG set triggers this GCC
warning:
drivers/net/wireless/ipw2x00/libipw_wx.c:526:21: warning: unused variable 'dev' [-Wunused-variable]

The cause of this warning is that, without CONFIG_LIBIPW_DEBUG set,
LIBIPW_DEBUG_WX compiles away. Fix it by substituting ieee->dev for (its
equivalent) dev.

Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <[email protected]>
---
0) I noticed this warning while building v3.6-rc6 on current Fedora 17,
using Fedora's default config.

1) Compile tested only (by just compiling libipw_wx.o).

drivers/net/wireless/ipw2x00/libipw_wx.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2x00/libipw_wx.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2x00/libipw_wx.c
index 1571505..54aba47 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2x00/libipw_wx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ipw2x00/libipw_wx.c
@@ -675,7 +675,7 @@ int libipw_wx_set_encodeext(struct libipw_device *ieee,
}
done:
if (ieee->set_security)
- ieee->set_security(ieee->dev, &sec);
+ ieee->set_security(dev, &sec);

return ret;
}
--
1.7.11.4

2012-09-24 00:26:49

by Stanislav Yakovlev

Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipw2x00: silence GCC warning for unused variable 'dev'

Hello Paul,

On 21 September 2012 14:02, Paul Bolle <[email protected]> wrote:
> Building the libipw component without CONFIG_LIBIPW_DEBUG set triggers this GCC
> warning:
> drivers/net/wireless/ipw2x00/libipw_wx.c:526:21: warning: unused variable 'dev' [-Wunused-variable]
>
> The cause of this warning is that, without CONFIG_LIBIPW_DEBUG set,
> LIBIPW_DEBUG_WX compiles away. Fix it by substituting ieee->dev for (its
> equivalent) dev.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul Bolle <[email protected]>
> ---
> 0) I noticed this warning while building v3.6-rc6 on current Fedora 17,
> using Fedora's default config.
>
> 1) Compile tested only (by just compiling libipw_wx.o).
>
> drivers/net/wireless/ipw2x00/libipw_wx.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Looks fine, thanks.

Stanislav.