Re: [Qemu-devel] [RESEND RFC 5/6] hw/arm/sysbus-fdt: helpers for clock node generation

[Alex Bennée]

Eric Auger <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi Alex,
> On 12/17/2015 04:13 PM, Alex Bennée wrote:
>>
>> Peter Maydell <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> On 17 December 2015 at 13:28, Alex Bennée <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> Usually I would expect to see a pre-declaration of a function at the
>>>> head of the file and only if it is used before the actual definition of
>>>> the function. It doesn't make sense to pre-declare right before the
>>>> actual function definition itself.
>>>>
>>>> I'm surprised to hear the compiler complained, especially as nothing was
>>>> calling this function in this patch.
>>>
>>> The compiler complains if it sees a function which is not static
>>> and for which it hasn't previously seen a prototype, because
>>> generally this means that either (a) the function is file-local
>>> only and should have been declared static or (b) the function is
>>> not file-local but you forgot to put a prototype in a header so
>>> that other files can call it. (This is -Wmissing-prototypes.)
>>
>>
>> Ahh I see now. I guess if its declared static in this patch and not
>> used its going to complain about an unused function as well? Maybe that
>> suggests the patch should just be merged with patch where it is actually
>> used?
>
> my fear is that it becomes too big for review then.

It's a valid concern although I think in this case your patches are
fairly well contained.

> I suggest we wait
> for other comments and I will follow the consensus if any. I just wanted
> to emphasize I did not ignore your comment but I just don't know how to
> handle it at best ;-)

It's OK, there is often dark compromise involved in keeping the compiler
gods happy - as long as it compiles clean ;-)

>
> Thanks for your time!
>
> Regards
>
> Eric
>>
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> -- PMM
>>
>>
>> --
>> Alex Bennée
>>


--
Alex Bennée