Hi Mike, On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 9:49 PM, Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Friday, September 23, 2011 12:01:46 Simon Glass wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 5:25 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: >> > On Saturday, September 17, 2011 12:48:57 Simon Glass wrote: >> >> There are a few variables set but not used - this marks these as unused >> >> for the compiler. >> > >> > summary says "sandbox:" but i dont think this has anything to do with >> > sandbox. you're just using a newer compiler. >> > >> >> --- a/common/cmd_mem.c >> >> +++ b/common/cmd_mem.c >> >> >> >> - ulong addr, length, i, junk; >> >> + ulong addr, length, i, junk __attribute__((unused)); >> > >> > this one is tricky as we just want to read the value from the volatile >> > pointer. i'm guessing do "*longp++;" just adds a different warning ? >> >> Isn't that a nop? > > if it's volatile, it shouldn't be
I missed that. checkpatch warns me so badly on volatile that I assumed we didn't use it :-) > >> Well I can just assign it to a different variable - I will use 'size' >> in my new patch set. > > Marek Vasut posted a patch which dropped the assignment and it seems to not > add any warnings Yes, just tried it and it works fine. Regards, Simon > >> >> --- a/common/cmd_nvedit.c >> >> +++ b/common/cmd_nvedit.c >> >> >> >> - int len; >> >> + int len __attribute((unused)); >> > >> > this file though looks like we should just delete "len" >> >> Yes, done. I don't use lint anyway. > > he also posted a fix for this :) > -mike > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
