On 2/14/23 16:56, Alexander Lobakin wrote: > From: Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@xxxxxxxxx> > Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2023 15:28:24 +0000 > >> On 14/02/2023 07:39, Leon Romanovsky wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 06:34:22PM +0000, alejandro.lucero-palau@xxxxxxx wrote: >>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_RTC_LIB >>>> + u64 tstamp; >>>> +#endif >>> If you are going to resubmit the series. >>> >>> Documentation/process/coding-style.rst >>> 1140 21) Conditional Compilation >>> 1141 --------------------------- >>> .... >>> 1156 If you have a function or variable which may potentially go unused in a >>> 1157 particular configuration, and the compiler would warn about its definition >>> 1158 going unused, mark the definition as __maybe_unused rather than wrapping it in >>> 1159 a preprocessor conditional. (However, if a function or variable *always* goes >>> 1160 unused, delete it.) >>> >>> Thanks >> FWIW, the existing code in sfc all uses the preprocessor >> conditional approach; maybe it's better to be consistent >> within the driver? >> > When it comes to "consistency vs start doing it right" thing, I always > go for the latter. This "we'll fix it all one day" moment often tends to > never happen and it's applicable to any vendor or subsys. Stop doing > things the discouraged way often is a good (and sometimes the only) start. It is not clear to me what you prefer, if fixing this now or leaving it and fixing it later. The first sentence in your comment suggest the latter to me. The rest of the comment suggests the fix it now. Anyway, patchwork says changes requested, so I'll send v8. Thanks > Thanks, > Olek
