linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] qed: mark symbols static where possible

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: <DM5PR11MB1723EE385BEB0EFB1AD6CC1497F80@DM5PR11MB1723.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Wed, 7 Sep 2016 11:55:34 +0000
From:   Yuval Mintz <Yuval.Mintz@...gic.com>
To:     Baoyou Xie <baoyou.xie@...aro.org>
CC:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
        "xie.baoyou@....com.cn" <xie.baoyou@....com.cn>,
        Ariel Elior <Ariel.Elior@...gic.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] qed: mark symbols static where possible

> We get a few warnings when building kernel with W=1:
> drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qed/qed_l2.c:112:5: warning: no previous
> prototype for 'qed_sp_vport_start' [-Wmissing-prototypes]
> ....
> 
> In fact, these functions are only used in the file in which they are
> declared and don't need a declaration, but can be made static.
> so this patch marks these functions with 'static'.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Baoyou Xie <baoyou.xie@...aro.org>

Most of this changes are correct. I have 2 reservations, though:

1. qed_get_vport_stats() is in use in net-next by qed_main.c starting with
6c75424612a7 ("qed: Add support for NCSI statistics."), so we shouldn't
make it static.
[This raises the question of which repository was this patch built against?]

2. Regarding the changes in qed_cxt.c - some of the functions you're turning
into static are going to be used be other files in our pending RoCE driver
submissions [you could say those ARE really missing their prototypes].
I don't have a real objection to this change - I'm just stating that if you'll
change those now to static, we'll probably 'revert' the change in the near
future.