linux-kernel - Re: latest list of unused Kconfig variables

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: <alpine.LFD.1.00.0802131038130.30959@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:44:27 -0500 (EST)
From:	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...shcourse.ca>
To:	Josh Boyer <jwboyer@...il.com>
cc:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: latest list of unused Kconfig variables

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Josh Boyer wrote:

> OK.  Well all of your hits for 405EX, 440GRX, 440SPe, and
> WANT_DEVICE_TREE in arch/powerpc seem bogus.  I dunno if you prune
> those when reported or not.

not normally, but i don't know what you mean by "bogus":

  $ grep -r "config 405EX" *
  arch/powerpc/platforms/40x/Kconfig:config 405EX
  $

  $ grep -r CONFIG_405EX *
  arch/powerpc/configs/makalu_defconfig:CONFIG_405EX=y
  arch/powerpc/configs/kilauea_defconfig:CONFIG_405EX=y
  $

so, AFAICT, there exists a definition of the Kconfig variable 405EX,
which is subsequently not referenced *anywhere* in the tree except in
a couple defconfig files, which don't count.  how, then, does that
Kconfig variable have any practical value?  or am i missing something
painfully obvious?

> > > And you have false positives on several CPU variables, as they
> > > are used within Kconfig files themselves to select different
> > > sets of options.
> >
> > yes, i know ... perhaps there's a simple way to filter those out
> > but, at the moment, it's pure brute force.  i'm guessing i could
> > make that script a bit smarter but it probably isn't worth the
> > investment in time.  law of diminishing returns and all that.
>
> Maybe.  If the same false positives keep showing up people might
> ignore it.  I won't, but others might.

fair enough, but since this scanning happens only once every release,
it's not like it's a burden.  and if people want to ignore it, that's
fine, too.

rday
--

========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry:
    Have classroom, will lecture.

http://crashcourse.ca                          Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
========================================================================
--
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/