nvram_mutex is currently defined unconditionally, but is only used on
x86, ppc32 and m68k. This causes an unused symbol warning on other
architectures.

Restrict the mutex definition to the architectures that actually require
it and avoid generating unnecessary warnings on the remaining platforms.

Signed-off-by: Mukesh Kumar Chaurasiya (IBM) <mkchauras@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/char/nvram.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/char/nvram.c b/drivers/char/nvram.c
index 9eff426a9286..72ddb225a2ba 100644
--- a/drivers/char/nvram.c
+++ b/drivers/char/nvram.c
@@ -53,7 +53,10 @@
 #include <asm/nvram.h>
 #endif
 
+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PPC32) || IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86) || IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_M68K)
 static DEFINE_MUTEX(nvram_mutex);
+#endif
+
 static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(nvram_state_lock);
 static int nvram_open_cnt;	/* #times opened */
 static int nvram_open_mode;	/* special open modes */
-- 
2.54.0

Hi Mukesh,

On Mon, 25 May 2026 at 10:04, Mukesh Kumar Chaurasiya (IBM)
<mkchauras@gmail.com> wrote:
> nvram_mutex is currently defined unconditionally, but is only used on
> x86, ppc32 and m68k. This causes an unused symbol warning on other
> architectures.
>
> Restrict the mutex definition to the architectures that actually require
> it and avoid generating unnecessary warnings on the remaining platforms.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mukesh Kumar Chaurasiya (IBM) <mkchauras@gmail.com>

Thanks for your patch!

This seems to need more coordination in and outside IBM?

[PATCH v5] char/nvram: Remove redundant nvram_mutex
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260428061540.73668-1-venkat88@linux.ibm.com/

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert


--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds