linux-kernel - Re: unneeded internal declaration

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170926033539.hxwrjjpqeadkj4ky@x>
Date:   Mon, 25 Sep 2017 20:35:39 -0700
From:   Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
To:     Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers@...il.com>
Cc:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        kay@...y.org, avi@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: unneeded internal declaration

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 08:07:41PM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> today I noticed I was getting the warning:
> 
> arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c:64:32: warning: variable 'vmx_cpu_id' is not needed
> and will not be emitted [-Wunneeded-internal-declaration]
> 
> seems like this was added in commit: e9bda3b3d0ce7 "KVM: VMX:
> Auto-load on CPUs with VMX"
> 
> seems like other call sites of the MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE typically get
> added to an id_table of various driver structs.  Should that be the
> case here, or would a `__unused` modifier be a way forward (if so,
> please confirm, would be a good first bug for a friend)?

Many of those users seem to have an x86_match_cpu call in their init
function. vmx has its own checks; perhaps it'd make sense to use that
instead, which would also eliminate the warning?