On 03.10.2018 11:26, Jonathan Hunter wrote:
On 02/10/18 22:21, Arnd Bergmann wrote:The newly added tegra_bpmp_resume function is unused when CONFIG_PM is disabled: drivers/firmware/tegra/bpmp.c:847:12: error: 'tegra_bpmp_resume' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function] static int tegra_bpmp_resume(struct device *dev) Mark it as __maybe_unused to avoid the warning and let the compiler drop it silently. Fixes: cd40f6ff124c ("firmware: tegra: bpmp: Implement suspend/resume support") Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> --- drivers/firmware/tegra/bpmp.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/firmware/tegra/bpmp.c b/drivers/firmware/tegra/bpmp.c index 41448ba78be9..a3d5b518c10e 100644 --- a/drivers/firmware/tegra/bpmp.c +++ b/drivers/firmware/tegra/bpmp.c @@ -844,7 +844,7 @@ static int tegra_bpmp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) return err; }-static int tegra_bpmp_resume(struct device *dev)+static int __maybe_unused tegra_bpmp_resume(struct device *dev) { struct tegra_bpmp *bpmp = dev_get_drvdata(dev); unsigned int i;Arnd, is this seen with 32-bit ARM configs? Timo, does it make sense to make BPMP dependent on ARCH_TEGRA_186_SOC and ARCH_TEGRA_194_SOC instead of just ARCH_TEGRA? For 64-bit Tegra we have a dependency on PM so this should not be seen for 64-bit Tegra.
Jon, there will be eventually a BPMP driver for ARCH_TEGRA_210_SOC as well. So it is probably more appropriate to make BPMP dependent on ARM64 & ARCH_TEGRA.
-Timo
