Am 19.03.2012 13:31, schrieb Stefan Weil: > Am 19.03.2012 13:17, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi: >> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> >> wrote: >>> Am 17.03.2012 13:00, schrieb Stefan Weil: >>>> Function set_HILO is not needed anywhere. >>> >>> Does this cause any warnings? Given the state mips is currently in (TCG >>> patches queuing), I'd suggest to hold this off for a bit, but I don't >>> really mind either way. >>> >>> Commit message does not mention if this was never used in the first >>> place or became unused during TCG conversion or some other refactoring? >> >> It doesn't cause any warning on my build here, so there's no strict >> need for this patch. >> >> I have dropped the patch for now. Please resend if you want to get it >> in and address Andreas' questions. > > the function was never used. It should be removed just to keep > the code clean and free of unneeded functions. I noticed this > function when I looked after the functions which follow > (set_HIT0_LO, ...). Those functions are very similar, so I > think set_HILO was the copy master for those functions > (maybe used in a local code version whic was never committed).
Could you please check that it is not used by Richard Sandiford's, Khansa Butt's and Jia Liu's patches? Then I'll happily ack. > > Static inline functions never create a gcc warning when they > are unused, as far as I know. Maybe other tools like static code > analysers raise a warning. Sure, I was thinking of the static analysis tools you occasionally posted patches for. Andreas -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg