On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 10:14 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024, at 15:51, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > On 16.04.24 12:26, Miguel Ojeda wrote: > >> Hi David, Arnd, LoongArch, > >> > >> In a linux-next defconfig LLVM=1 build today I got: > >> > >> ./include/asm-generic/tlb.h:629:10: error: parameter 'ptep' set > >> but not used [-Werror,-Wunused-but-set-parameter] > >> 629 | pte_t *ptep, unsigned int nr, unsigned long address) > >> | ^ > >> > >> Indeed, in loongarch, `__tlb_remove_tlb_entry` does not do anything. > >> This seems the same that Arnd reported for arm64: > >> > >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240221154549.2026073-1-arnd@xxxxxxxxxx/ > >> > >> So perhaps the loongarch's one should also be changed into an static inline? > > > > 4d5bf0b6183f79ea361dd506365d2a471270735c is already part of v6.9-rc1. How come > > we see that only now on linux-next? > > Andrew merged my patch to enable -Wextra yesterday, and it appears > that this one fell through the cracks with my testing, either I > missed the combination of loongarch with clang, or I last tested > it before your patches got merged. > > > I assume we should see the same on upstream Linux with LLVM=1, correct? > > On upstream, it only shows up with 'make W=1'. > > > If so, we should likely just drop that completely and rely on the > > asm-generic one: > > > > diff --git a/arch/loongarch/include/asm/tlb.h > > b/arch/loongarch/include/asm/tlb.h > > index da7a3b5b9374a..e071f5e9e8580 100644 > > --- a/arch/loongarch/include/asm/tlb.h > > +++ b/arch/loongarch/include/asm/tlb.h > > @@ -132,8 +132,6 @@ static __always_inline void invtlb_all(u32 op, u32 > > info, u64 addr) > > ); > > } > > > > -#define __tlb_remove_tlb_entry(tlb, ptep, address) do { } while (0) > > - > > static void tlb_flush(struct mmu_gather *tlb); > > Yes, this looks like the best solution, and I can confirm that this > addresses the warning on linux-next. Emmm, this should be removed in the first place because x86 removed it at 5.12... Huacai > > Tested-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>
