| 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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 20:18:42 +0200
From: Stefan Hengelein <stefan.hengelein@....de>
To: feng.wu@...el.com
Cc: Valentin Rothberg <valentinrothberg@...il.com>,
Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>,
Andreas Ruprecht <rupran@...server.de>, tglx@...utronix.de,
x86@...nel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
rusty@...tcorp.com.au, mingo@...hat.com
Subject: unnecessary #ifdefs
Hi Feng Wu,
your commits
f6b3c72c23661e55 ("x86/irq: Define a global vector for VT-d Posted-Interrupts")
501b32653ebf49114c ("x86/irq: Show statistics information for
posted-interrupts")
showed up in linux-next today (i.e. next-20150526).
Both commits add "#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_KVM" blocks to either
arch/x86/kernel/irq.c or arch/x86/include/asm/irq.h
However, HAVE_KVM is always enabled in x86, since the root option X86
always selects HAVE_KVM.
How is the policy here, are these blocks inserted in case the "select
HAVE_KVM" is removed from X86 someday or did you mean to use
CONFIG_KVM?
I detected the issue with undertaker-checkpatch [1, 2] running on a
bot in Erlangen [3] to make daily checks of commits in linux-next for
#ifdef related defects.
Best Regards,
Stefan
[1] https://undertaker.cs.fau.de
[2] http://www.linuxplumbersconf.org/2014/ocw/proposals/1863
[3] https://cados.cs.fau.de
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists