linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/5] uml: Fix warning due to missing task

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.LNX.2.00.1004211138320.7579@pobox.suse.cz>
Date:	Wed, 21 Apr 2010 11:38:53 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To:	Amerigo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc:	Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@....de>, Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] uml: Fix warning due to missing task_struct
 declaration

On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, Amerigo Wang wrote:

> >  CC      arch/um/sys-i386/elfcore.o
> >In file included from /data/linux-2.6/include/linux/elf.h:8,
> >                 from /data/linux-2.6/arch/um/sys-i386/elfcore.c:2:
> >/data/linux-2.6/arch/um/sys-i386/asm/elf.h:78: warning: ‘struct task_struct’ declared inside parameter list
> >/data/linux-2.6/arch/um/sys-i386/asm/elf.h:78: warning: its scope is only this definition or declaration, which is probably not what you want
> >
> >I guess not many people build against i386 hosts anymore, so this
> >remained widely unnoticed.
> >
> >> 
> >> If it built before, without having a task_struct declaration, I think
> >> that means that the elf_core_copy_fpregs was never used.  The
> >> task_struct * in the declaration would become a private task_struct,
> >> known only to the declaration.  If the implementation or callers have
> >> the regular task_struct, it will be a different one, and the
> >> prototypes will conflict due to the different types of the first
> >> parameter.
> >
> >This is just a forward declaration (that many arch elf header include),
> >so no such problem exists.
> >
> >BTW, to answer the other question in this thread: We have a circular
> >dependency that prevents including sched.h.
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> This is the right reason to do this. Ok then, thanks.
> 
> But it looks like x86_64 needs this too.
> 
> 
> BTW, I don't think compile warning fixes are trivial enough to go
> to trivial@...nel.org.

Why?

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
--
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/