* Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > El Wed, May 24, 2017 at 02:01:15PM -0700 David Rientjes ha dit: > > > GCC explicitly does not warn for unused static inline functions for > > -Wunused-function. The manual states: > > > > Warn whenever a static function is declared but not defined or > > a non-inline static function is unused. > > > > Clang does warn for static inline functions that are unused. > > > > It turns out that suppressing the warnings avoids potentially complex > > #ifdef directives, which also reduces LOC. > > > > Supress the warning for clang. > > > > Signed-off-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > As expressed earlier in other threads, I don't think gcc's behavior is > preferable in this case. The warning on static inline functions (only > in .c files) allows to detect truly unused code. About 50% of the > warnings I have looked into so far fall into this category. > > In my opinion it is more valuable to detect dead code than not having > a few more __maybe_unused attributes (there aren't really that many > instances, at least with x86 and arm64 defconfig). In most cases it is > not necessary to use #ifdef, it is an option which is preferred by > some maintainers. The reduced LOC is arguable, since dectecting dead > code allows to remove it. Static inline functions in headers are often not dead code. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>
