Message ID | 20111209231926.6C7474099F@eskimo.mtv.corp.google.com |
---|---|
State | Superseded |
Delegated to: | Graeme Russ |
Headers | show |
diff --git a/arch/x86/cpu/sc520/sc520_timer.c b/arch/x86/cpu/sc520/sc520_timer.c index 495a694..a7bbe92 100644 --- a/arch/x86/cpu/sc520/sc520_timer.c +++ b/arch/x86/cpu/sc520/sc520_timer.c @@ -87,4 +87,5 @@ void sc520_udelay(unsigned long usec) m += readw(&sc520_mmcr->swtmrmilli); u = readw(&sc520_mmcr->swtmrmicro) + (m * 1000); } while (u < usec); + (void) temp; } diff --git a/board/eNET/eNET.c b/board/eNET/eNET.c index 429fe1b..2f26470 100644 --- a/board/eNET/eNET.c +++ b/board/eNET/eNET.c @@ -178,11 +178,6 @@ void show_boot_progress(int val) int last_stage_init(void) { - int minor; - int major; - - major = minor = 0; - outb(0x00, LED_LATCH_ADDRESS); register_timer_isr(enet_timer_isr);
There have been a couple of unused variable cases, causing compilation warnings when building the eNET target. While the board/eNET/eNET.c:last_stage_init() case seems a leftover from a quick edit, the arch/x86/cpu/sc520/sc520_timer.c:sc520_udelay() seems to actually require accessing the registers discarding the values. The source code is being modified accordingly. TEST: - the eNET target now builds cleanly - examining disassembled sc520_timer.o shows that the registers are still being accessed in the beginning of the function. Signed-off-by: Vadim Bendebury <vbendeb@chromium.org> --- arch/x86/cpu/sc520/sc520_timer.c | 1 + board/eNET/eNET.c | 5 ----- 2 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)