On 15/03/2023 06:22, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Sun, 12 Mar 2023 12:57:29 +0200 Vladimir Oltean wrote: >>> Sorry, I don't follow. I don't touch that wrappers, just fix errors >>> related to OF device ID tables, although in few cases it is indeed >>> related to of_match_node. >> >> I'm saying this because in lantiq_gswip.c, xway_gphy_match is accessed >> through of_match_node(). If the shim definition for of_match_node() was >> different, the variable wouldn't have been unused with CONFIG_OF=n. >> I guess it's worth considering changing that wrapper instead of adding >> the __maybe_unused. > > Hi Krzysztof, have you had a chance to check if using an empty static > inline is enough to silence the compiler? Seems like it could save > us quite some churn? Or do we want the of_match_node() decorations > to go away in general? I am pretty sure fixing of_match_node() and of_match_ptr() (independent case) would supersed this patchset, but it is a bit bigger change than I have available time now. I didn't try it yet. Best regards, Krzysztof
