On Thursday 17 December 2015 20:40:17 Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > > My conclusion for now is:
> > > 
> > > There needs something to be done surely, but currently I don't have the
> > > bandwidth to do it or even play around with it. I am not fully happy
> > > with your patches as well because __maybe_unused has some kind of "last
> > > resort" feeling to me.
> > 
> > I generally like __maybe_unused, but it's a matter of personal preference.
> > We could avoid the __maybe_unused if the reg_slave/unreg_slave callback
> > pointers are always available in struct i2c_algorithm.
> Yes, I was thinking in this direction, looking at how PM does it. Needs
> some playing around, though.

I think PM gets it slightly wrong, the way you have to use #ifdef leads
to subtle bugs all the time, and I actually have a patch that converts
a few dozen drivers to use __maybe_unused to shut up build warnings and

What you can do though is to use a reference like

#define __i2c_slave_ptr(x) (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE) ? (x) : NULL)

        .reg_slave = __i2c_slave_ptr(em_i2c_reg_slave),
        .unreg_slave = __i2c_slave_ptr(em_i2c_unreg_slave),

This has the same effect as the __maybe_unused annotation.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to