On Fri, 06 Nov 2020, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: > On 11/6/20 8:41 AM, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Thu, 05 Nov 2020, Ahmad Fatoum wrote: > > > >> Hello Lee, > >> > >> On 11/5/20 3:45 PM, Lee Jones wrote: > >>> In the macro for_each_oldnew_crtc_in_state() 'crtc_state' is provided > >>> as a container for state->crtcs[i].new_state, but is not utilised in > >>> this use-case. We cannot simply delete the variable, so here we tell > >>> the compiler that we're intentionally discarding the read value. > >> > >> for_each_oldnew_crtc_in_state already (void) casts the drm_crtc and the old > >> drm_crtc_state to silence unused-but-set-variable warning. Should we maybe > >> (void) cast the new crtc_state as well? > > > > From what I saw, it only void casts the ones which aren't assigned. > > How do you mean? I wonder if > > #define for_each_oldnew_crtc_in_state(__state, crtc, old_crtc_state, new_crtc_state, __i) \ > for ((__i) = 0; \ > (__i) < (__state)->dev->mode_config.num_crtc; \ > (__i)++) \ > for_each_if ((__state)->crtcs[__i].ptr && \ > ((crtc) = (__state)->crtcs[__i].ptr, \ > (void)(crtc) /* Only to avoid unused-but-set-variable warning */, \ > (old_crtc_state) = (__state)->crtcs[__i].old_state, \ > (void)(old_crtc_state) /* Only to avoid unused-but-set-variable warning */, \ > - (new_crtc_state) = (__state)->crtcs[__i].new_state, 1)) > + (new_crtc_state) = (__state)->crtcs[__i].new_state, \ > + (void)(new_crtc_state), 1)) > > wouldn't be better. That also works for me. I can fix this up. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
