2011/7/9 Eric Blake <eblake@xxxxxxxxxx>: > The compiler might optimize based on our declaration that something > is unused. Can this actually happen? The unused marker only says that something _might_ be unused. I don't think that a compiler can optimize something based on this when it cannot actually prove that it is really unused. > Putting that declaration in the header risks getting > out of sync with the actual implementation, so it belongs better > only in the .c files. We were mostly compliant, and a new syntax > check will help us in the future. This is a valid point. > * cfg.mk (sc_avoic_attribute_unused_in_header): New syntax check. > * src/nodeinfo.h (nodeGetCPUStats, nodeGetMemoryStats): Delete > attribute already present in .c file. > * src/qemu/qemu_domain.h (qemuDomainEventFlush): Likewise. > * src/util/virterror_internal.h (virReportErrorHelper): Parameters > are actually used by .c file. > * src/xenxs/xen_sxpr.h (xenFormatSxprDisk): Adjust prototype. > * src/xenxs/xen_sxpr.c (xenFormatSxprDisk): Delete unused argument. > (xenFormatSxpr): Adjust caller. > * src/xen/xend_internal.c (xenDaemonAttachDeviceFlags) > (xenDaemonUpdateDeviceFlags): Likewise. > Suggested by Daniel Veillard. > --- > > As suggested here: > https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2011-July/msg00501.html > > cfg.mk | 8 ++++++++ > src/nodeinfo.h | 4 ++-- > src/qemu/qemu_domain.h | 2 +- > src/util/virterror_internal.h | 8 ++++---- > src/xen/xend_internal.c | 12 +++++------- > src/xenxs/xen_sxpr.c | 5 ++--- > src/xenxs/xen_sxpr.h | 3 +-- > 7 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-) ACK. -- Matthias Bolte http://photron.blogspot.com -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list