On 30.11.2020 17:02, Ian Lepore wrote:
On Mon, 2020-11-30 at 14:51 +0000, Michal Meloun wrote:
Author: mmel
Date: Mon Nov 30 14:51:48 2020
New Revision: 368187
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/368187
Log:
Unbreak r368167 in userland. Decorate unused arguments.
Reported by: kp, tuexen, jenkins, and many others
MFC with: r368167
Modified:
head/sys/dev/nvme/nvme.h
Modified: head/sys/dev/nvme/nvme.h
=====================================================================
=========
--- head/sys/dev/nvme/nvme.h Mon Nov 30 14:49:13 2020 (r368186)
+++ head/sys/dev/nvme/nvme.h Mon Nov 30 14:51:48 2020 (r368187)
@@ -1728,9 +1728,15 @@ extern int nvme_use_nvd;
#endif /* _KERNEL */
+#if _BYTE_ORDER != _LITTLE_ENDIAN
+#define MODIF
+#else
+#define MODIF __unused
+#endif
+
/* Endianess conversion functions for NVMe structs */
static inline
-void nvme_completion_swapbytes(struct nvme_completion *s)
+void nvme_completion_swapbytes(struct nvme_completion *s MODIF)
IMO, this is pretty ugly, it causes the brain to screech to a halt when
you see it. Why not just add an unconditional __unused to the
functions? The unused attribute is defined as marking the variable as
"potentially unused" -- there is no penalty for having it there and
then actually using the variable.
I understand, (and I have significant tendency to agree) but I did not
find more correct way how to do it.
Are you sure that __unused is defined as *potentially* unused? I cannot
find nothing about this and you known how are compiler guys creative
with generating of new warnings...
I known that C++17 have 'maybe_unused' attribute, but relationship to
standard '__unused' looks unclear.
In any case, I have not single problem to change this to the proposed
style if we found that this is the optimal way.
Michal
_______________________________________________
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
