On 12/09/2024 13:15, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Sep 2024, Marc Gonzalez wrote:
>> On 11/09/2024 12:23, Jani Nikula wrote:
>>> On Tue, 10 Sep 2024, Marc Gonzalez wrote:
>>>> On 10/09/2024 16:51, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 01:03:43PM GMT, Jani Nikula wrote:
>>>>>> See also commit 6863f5643dd7 ("kbuild: allow Clang to find unused static
>>>>>> inline functions for W=1 build").
>
> [snip]
>
>>> GCC doesn't catch unused static inlines, while Clang does.
>>
>> It makes no sense to me that adding "inline" would prevent
>> GCC from diagnosing the issue... GCC should simply ignore
>> the "inline" keyword when definition is not in a header file
>> (maybe they don't store "origin").
>
> Please just read the commit message for the commit I reference above for
> details. There's not much more I could say about it.
OK, I read 6863f5643dd7.
My remark still stands.
GCC's decision to not warn for unused static inline functions
in source files (not headers) is questionable at best.
(For the record, I think clang is the devil's spawn.)
Regards
