linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] xfs: #define out unused parameters of xfs_bmap_add_free and xfs_btree_read

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]

Date:	Tue, 22 Apr 2008 22:46:16 +0200
From:	Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>
To:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...deen.net>
Cc:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: #define out unused parameters of	xfs_bmap_add_free and xfs_btree_read_bufl

On Tuesday 22 April 2008 19:26, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> It would be a huge undertaking.
> 
> Just building xfs w/ the warning in place exposes tons of unused
> parameter warnings from outside xfs as well.

I was grepping them away.

> But, if it was deemed important enough, you could go annotate them as
> unused, I suppose, and hack away at it...  Does marking as unused just
> shut up the warning or does it let gcc do further optimizations?

It just shuts up the warning. It is still useful - suppresses
false positives.

I didn't check whether gcc is clever enough to reuse stack space
occupied by unused parameter(s) as a free space for automatic
variables. In theory it is allowed to do that and reduce stack usage
that way.
--
vda
--
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/