linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/intel: Fix unwind errors from PEBS entries (mk-II)

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]

Date:   Tue, 7 Aug 2018 11:05:44 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Fubo Chen <fubo.chen@...il.com>
Cc:     jpoimboe@...hat.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        bhole_prashant_q7@....ntt.co.jp,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/intel: Fix unwind errors from PEBS entries
 (mk-II)

On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 04:04:40PM -0700, Fubo Chen wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 3:30 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 02:28:18PM -0700, Fubo Chen wrote:
> > > Do you think the patch below is sufficient to suppress the sparse warning?
> >
> > Why would I want to make the code ugly to supress it?
> 
> There are many kernel developers who use sparse to verify the
> correctness of endianness annotations (__be32, __le32, ...). When
> compiling kernel code with sparse every warning that is reported by
> sparse should be analyzed. Most kernel developers consider it annoying
> having to deal with false positive warnings. So I think that is useful
> to suppress false positive sparse warnings if it is possible to
> suppress false positives with a reasonable effort.

Last time I used sparse there were a metric ton of warnings. I really
can't be bothered about one more. Maybe fix sparse if you're bothered?