linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tpm/tpm_crb: mark PM functions as __maybe

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: <CAK8P3a25sh0U=N9E1pWACL_9h7VBseUBX50WZe5rXMpNHY=GbA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 20 Mar 2017 13:27:32 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     "Winkler, Tomas" <tomas.winkler@...el.com>
Cc:     Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
        Marcel Selhorst <tpmdd@...horst.net>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
        Jerry Snitselaar <jsnitsel@...hat.com>,
        "tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net" 
        <tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tpm/tpm_crb: mark PM functions as __maybe_unused

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Winkler, Tomas <tomas.winkler@...el.com> wrote:
>>
>> When CONFIG_PM_SLEEP is disabled, we get a warning about unused
>> functions:
>>
>> drivers/char/tpm/tpm_crb.c:551:12: error: 'crb_pm_resume' defined but not
>> used [-Werror=unused-function]
>> drivers/char/tpm/tpm_crb.c:540:12: error: 'crb_pm_suspend' defined but not
>> used [-Werror=unused-function]
>>
> Note that the runtime_pm functions are not affected by this issue the macro
> SET_RUNTIME_PM_OPS is under CONFIG_PM. This patch does more than described.

Well, the problem is that there is an #ifdef that is wrong here as I
tried to indicate:

>> We could solve this with more sophistated #ifdefs, but a simpler and safer way
>> is to just mark them as __maybe_unused.

>> @@ -547,7 +546,7 @@ static int crb_pm_suspend(struct device *dev)
>>       return crb_pm_runtime_suspend(dev);
>>  }
>
> It's enough to
> #endif /* CONFIG_PM */
> #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
>> -static int crb_pm_resume(struct device *dev)
>> +static __maybe_unused int crb_pm_resume(struct device *dev)
>>  {
>>       int ret;
>>
>> @@ -558,8 +557,6 @@ static int crb_pm_resume(struct device *dev)
>>       return tpm_pm_resume(dev);
>>  }
>>
>> -#endif /* CONFIG_PM */
> And
> #endif CONFIG_PM_SLEEP

This tends to cause other warnings half of the time, when both the
runtime-pm and pm-sleep variants call into another function that
becomes unused when both are disabled.

       Arnd