Re: [PATCH -next] arm64/spinlock: fix a -Wunused-function warning

[Will Deacon]

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 11:29:45AM -0500, Qian Cai wrote:
> The commit f5bfdc8e3947 ("locking/osq: Use optimized spinning loop for
> arm64") introduced a warning from Clang because vcpu_is_preempted() is
> compiled away,
> 
> kernel/locking/osq_lock.c:25:19: warning: unused function 'node_cpu'
> [-Wunused-function]
> static inline int node_cpu(struct optimistic_spin_node *node)
>                   ^
> 1 warning generated.
> 
> Since vcpu_is_preempted() had already been defined in
> include/linux/sched.h as false, just comment out the redundant macro, so
> it can still be served for the documentation purpose.
> 
> Fixes: f5bfdc8e3947 ("locking/osq: Use optimized spinning loop for arm64")
> Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <cai@xxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h
> index 102404dc1e13..b05f82e8ba19 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h
> @@ -17,7 +17,8 @@
>   *
>   * See:
>   * https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200110100612.GC2827@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> + *
> + * #define vcpu_is_preempted(cpu)	false
>   */
> -#define vcpu_is_preempted(cpu)	false

Damn, the whole point of this was to warn in the case that
vcpu_is_preempted() does get defined for arm64. Can we force it to evaluate
the macro argument instead (e.g. ({ (cpu), false; }) or something)?

Will