> So, saying "unused" and then "used" doesn't seem to make any sense. unused and used attributes do not cancel each other. They have different semantics. I agree this part of the code needs some attention. zero sized arrays are not C compliant as I understand it, even more so when it is declared outside of a struct.
On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 4:58 PM Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 03:33:20PM -0800, Aditya Kumar wrote: > > > The variable gets dropped by clang compiler in an optimized builds. > > Adding attribute((used)) allows the symbol to be preserved. Similar > > changes have been proposed in the past e.g., > > 569524741a01e1a96fc2b75dd7e5d12e41ce6c2b for ll_entry_declare macro. > > > > Signed-off-by: AdityaK <appu...@google.com> > > Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > > --- > > include/linker_lists.h | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/linker_lists.h b/include/linker_lists.h > > index d3da9d44e8..4cd13c3bc8 100644 > > --- a/include/linker_lists.h > > +++ b/include/linker_lists.h > > @@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ > > #define ll_entry_start(_type, _list) \ > > ({ \ > > static char start[0] __aligned(CONFIG_LINKER_LIST_ALIGN) \ > > - __attribute__((unused)) \ > > + __attribute__((unused)) __attribute__((used)) \ > > __section("__u_boot_list_2_"#_list"_1"); \ > > (_type *)&start; \ > > }) > > So, saying "unused" and then "used" doesn't seem to make any sense. And > given some other problems we see with newer clang, which Simon reports > this patch doesn't fully fix, we probably need to give that area a good > going over to see what attributes do and don't make sense, really. > > -- > Tom >