[PATCH v5 02/14] gpio: brcmstb: Use modern PM macros
Andy Shevchenko
andriy.shevchenko at intel.com
Mon Nov 24 06:49:00 PST 2025
On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 03:20:00PM +0100, Jonas Gorski wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 2:52 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andy.shevchenko at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 2:40 PM Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 1:39 AM Jisheng Zhang <jszhang at kernel.org> wrote:
...
> > > > static const struct dev_pm_ops brcmstb_gpio_pm_ops = {
> > > > - .suspend_noirq = brcmstb_gpio_suspend,
> > > > - .resume_noirq = brcmstb_gpio_resume,
> > > > + .suspend_noirq = pm_sleep_ptr(brcmstb_gpio_suspend),
> > > > + .resume_noirq = pm_sleep_ptr(brcmstb_gpio_resume),
> > > > };
...
> > > > - .pm = &brcmstb_gpio_pm_ops,
> > > > + .pm = pm_sleep_ptr(&brcmstb_gpio_pm_ops),
> > >
> > > won't this cause a "brcmstb_gpio_pm_ops is unused" compile warning for
> > > !CONFIG_PM_SLEEP?
> > >
> > > You probably need to add a __maybe_unused to brcmstb_gpio_pm_ops
> > > (which incidentally DEFINE_NOIRQ_DEV_PM_OPS() also doesn't set, but
> > > all other *_DEV_PM_OPS() macros do).
Do they? I mean the modern ones and not that are deprecated.
> > Shouldn't it be covered by the same trick as pm_sleep_ptr() does for functions?
>
> pm_sleep_ptr() becomes NULL for !CONFIG_PM_SLEEP, so there is no
> reference then anymore to brcmstb_gpio_pm_ops. You would need a
> wrapper for brcmstb_gpio_pm_ops itself to conditionally define it to
> avoid the warning, or add __maybe_unused to it to silence it.
PTR_IF() magic is exactly to make sure compiler will have a visibility while
dropping a dead code. Did I miss anything?
> Note how SIMPLE_DEV_PM_OPS() and UNIVERSAL_DEV_PM_OPS() tag the struct
> with it (for that reason I assume).
Both are deprecated. Not a good orienteer.
None of the new approach uses __maybe_unused. (See DEFINE_*() macros in pm.h.)
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list