linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline functions

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAK8P3a0Ys1ONq+F1Wu50G1XV9phRkiZrnO5DxX6ELJM20kh0ZA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 8 Jun 2017 10:59:43 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] clang: 'unused-function' warning on static inline functions

On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 9:43 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 11:28 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> I even found one function that should be called but is not:
> __ila_hash_secret_init(). This one might be a serious bug,
> or it might be harmless.
>
>  [Adding Tom Herbert to Cc here, Tom, please have a look
> at net/ipv6/ila/ila_xlat.c for the missing initialization of hashrnd]

I submitted a patch for this one now, and another one for a function
in kernel/cpu.c that was obviously meant to be removed not too long
ago. I checked that all other instances of the warning I found in the
kernel are indeed harmless and don't need a patch when there is
no warning.

       Arnd