On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 06:05:29PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > Commit 143e1e28cb (sched: Rework sched_domain topology definition) > introduced a number of functions with a return value of 'const int'. > gcc doesn't know what to do with that and, if the kernel is compiled > with W=1, complains with the following warnings whenever sched.h > is included. > > include/linux/sched.h:875:25: warning: > type qualifiers ignored on function return type > include/linux/sched.h:882:25: warning: > type qualifiers ignored on function return type > include/linux/sched.h:889:25: warning: > type qualifiers ignored on function return type > include/linux/sched.h:1002:21: warning: > type qualifiers ignored on function return type > > Commits fb2aa855 (sched, ARM: Create a dedicated scheduler topology table) > and 607b45e9a (sched, powerpc: Create a dedicated topology table) introduce > the same warning in the arm and powerpc code. > > Drop 'const' from the function declarations to fix the problem. > > The fix for all three patches has to be applied together to avoid > compilation failures for the affected architectures. > > Cc: Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggem...@arm.com> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> > Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <b...@kernel.crashing.org> > Cc: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guit...@linaro.org> > Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <li...@roeck-us.net> > --- > v2: Fix problem in all affected architectures with a single patch > to avoid compilation errors. > > arch/arm/kernel/topology.c | 2 +- > arch/powerpc/kernel/smp.c | 2 +- > include/linux/sched.h | 8 ++++---- > 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c > index 9d85318..e35d880 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c > +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c > @@ -275,7 +275,7 @@ void store_cpu_topology(unsigned int cpuid) > cpu_topology[cpuid].socket_id, mpidr); > } > > -static inline const int cpu_corepower_flags(void) > +static inline int cpu_corepower_flags(void) > { > return SD_SHARE_PKG_RESOURCES | SD_SHARE_POWERDOMAIN; > } Maybe the author's intention was:
static inline int cpu_corepower_flags(void) __attribute__((const)); ? This specifies that the function has no side effects and the return value only depends on the (here non-existing) function arguments. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev