On 03.09.2025 09:54, Jan Beulich wrote: > It's not quite clear whether the two functions involved violate only rule > 2.1 (dead code, not accepted so far) or even rule 2.2 (unreachable code). > I'm leaning towards the latter, hence the changes would be an active fix. > > This is effectively follow-on to "x86/apic: Drop vestigial pieces (Intel > VFM cleanup)". > > 1: drop setup_ioapic_ids_from_mpc() > 2: drop io_apic_get_unique_id()
Just to mention: This drops about 7% (in terms of LoC) from io_apic.c Jan
