Hi Conor,
On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 10:17 AM <Conor.Dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 05/10/2022 09:58, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> >
> > On 5 October 2022 09:44:56 IST, "Lad, Prabhakar" <prabhakar.csengg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Hi Conor,
> >>
> >> Thank you for the review.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 6:43 PM Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >>>> +static void cpu_dcache_wb_range(unsigned long start,
> >>>> + unsigned long end,
> >>>> + int line_size)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> + bool ucctl_ok = false;
> >>>> + unsigned long pa;
> >>>> + int mhartid = 0;
> >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> >>>> + mhartid = smp_processor_id();
> >>>> +#endif
> >>>
> >>> Won't this produce complaints from your if you compile with CONFIG_SMP
> >>> set?
> >>>
> >> No I dont see a build issue with SMP enabled, do you see any reason
> >> why it should fail?
> >
> > Not fail but complain about the unused variable.
> >
>
> Not unused variable, sorry but the unused 0 that it was initialised with*
No, it doesn't complain (I dont think compilers complain of such
unused assignments, maybe I'm wrong). BTW I am using GCC 9.4.0. Do you
think I need to update it?
Cheers,
Prabhakar
