linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH linux-next v4 07/11] MIPS: bcm63xx: nvram: Remove unused bcm63xx_nvram_get_psi

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: <20160126191607.GA111152@google.com>
Date:	Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:16:07 -0800
From:	Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>
To:	Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>,
	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
Cc:	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	Kevin Cernekee <cernekee@...il.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Jonas Gorski <jogo@...nwrt.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	MIPS Mailing List <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>,
	MTD Maling List <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
	sfr@...b.auug.org.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next v4 07/11] MIPS: bcm63xx: nvram: Remove unused
 bcm63xx_nvram_get_psi_size() function

On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 10:50:13PM +0000, Simon Arlott wrote:
> Remove bcm63xx_nvram_get_psi_size() as it now has no users.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Simon Arlott <simon@...e.lp0.eu>
> ---
> v4: New patch.

Ralf,

Please revert this and send it to Linus (or else, I can send it myself).
This is causing build failures, because I didn't take the rest of
Simon's series yet.

drivers/mtd/bcm63xxpart.c: In function 'bcm63xx_parse_cfe_partitions':
drivers/mtd/bcm63xxpart.c:93:2: error: implicit declaration of function 'bcm63xx_nvram_get_psi_size' [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]

I will reply to the series if/when I accept any patches from it. I would
appreciate it if you would do the same.

Also...did this ever make it to linux-next? I'd think somebody's build
bots would have complained about the build failure.

Regards,
Brian

>  arch/mips/bcm63xx/nvram.c                          | 11 -----------
>  arch/mips/include/asm/mach-bcm63xx/bcm63xx_nvram.h |  2 --
>  2 files changed, 13 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/mips/bcm63xx/nvram.c b/arch/mips/bcm63xx/nvram.c
> index 05757ae..5f2bc1e 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/bcm63xx/nvram.c
> +++ b/arch/mips/bcm63xx/nvram.c
> @@ -19,8 +19,6 @@
>  
>  #include <bcm63xx_nvram.h>
>  
> -#define BCM63XX_DEFAULT_PSI_SIZE	64
> -
>  static struct bcm963xx_nvram nvram;
>  static int mac_addr_used;
>  
> @@ -87,12 +85,3 @@ int bcm63xx_nvram_get_mac_address(u8 *mac)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(bcm63xx_nvram_get_mac_address);
> -
> -int bcm63xx_nvram_get_psi_size(void)
> -{
> -	if (nvram.psi_size > 0)
> -		return nvram.psi_size;
> -
> -	return BCM63XX_DEFAULT_PSI_SIZE;
> -}
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL(bcm63xx_nvram_get_psi_size);
> diff --git a/arch/mips/include/asm/mach-bcm63xx/bcm63xx_nvram.h b/arch/mips/include/asm/mach-bcm63xx/bcm63xx_nvram.h
> index 348df49..4e0b6bc 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/include/asm/mach-bcm63xx/bcm63xx_nvram.h
> +++ b/arch/mips/include/asm/mach-bcm63xx/bcm63xx_nvram.h
> @@ -30,6 +30,4 @@ u8 *bcm63xx_nvram_get_name(void);
>   */
>  int bcm63xx_nvram_get_mac_address(u8 *mac);
>  
> -int bcm63xx_nvram_get_psi_size(void);
> -
>  #endif /* BCM63XX_NVRAM_H */
> -- 
> 2.1.4
> 
> -- 
> Simon Arlott