On Thu, 06 Jun 2024, pengfuyuan <pengfuyuan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> We do not call komeda_debugfs_init() and the debugfs core function
> declaration if CONFIG_DEBUG_FS is not defined, but we should not
> compile it either because the debugfs core function declaration is
> not included.
>
> Reported-by: k2ci <kernel-bot@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: pengfuyuan <pengfuyuan@xxxxxxxxxx>
An interesting alternative might actually be to remove *all* the
CONFIG_DEBUG_FS conditional compilation from the file. Since the debugfs
functions have no-op stubs for CONFIG_DEBUG_FS=n, the compiler will
optimize the rest away, because they're no longer referenced. (For the
same reason, I don't think this patch has an impact for code size.)
The upside for removing conditional compilation is that you'll actually
do build testing for both CONFIG_DEBUG_FS config values. Assuming most
developers have it enabled, there's not a lot of testing going on for
CONFIG_DEBUG_FS=n, and you might introduce build failures with the
conditional compilation.
Of course, up to Liviu to decide.
BR,
Jani.
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c
> index 14ee79becacb..7ada8e6f407c 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/arm/display/komeda/komeda_dev.c
> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>
> #include "komeda_dev.h"
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
> static int komeda_register_show(struct seq_file *sf, void *x)
> {
> struct komeda_dev *mdev = sf->private;
> @@ -43,7 +44,6 @@ static int komeda_register_show(struct seq_file *sf, void *x)
>
> DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE(komeda_register);
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
> static void komeda_debugfs_init(struct komeda_dev *mdev)
> {
> if (!debugfs_initialized())
--
Jani Nikula, Intel
