On Tue, 21 Jan 2014, Philipp Hachtmann wrote: > > Not sure why you don't just do a one line patch: > > > > - phys_addr_t size; > > + phys_addr_t size __maybe_unused; > > to fix it. > > Just because I did not know that __maybe_unused thing. > - phys_addr_t size; + phys_addr_t size = 0; would have done the same thing. The compiler generated code isn't going to change with either of these, so we're only talking about how the source code is structured. If you and Andrew believe that adding block scope to something so trivial then that's your taste. Looks ugly to me. -- 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>