linux-kernel - Re: [patch 01/10] compiler: define __attribute_unused_

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705031154310.2312@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Date:	Thu, 3 May 2007 11:56:34 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>
cc:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 01/10] compiler: define __attribute_unused__

On Thu, 3 May 2007, Adrian Bunk wrote:

> > That's only addressing part of the issue.  What about automatic or static 
> > external variables that are declared but may go unreferenced depending on 
> 
> This is only about static code. For non-static code it would be
> impossible for gcc to issue warnings.
> 

static external variables are certainly still static code and gcc issues 
the proper warnings if I do:

	static struct bootnode nodes[MAX_NUMNODES];

and I never reference nodes.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/