linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3.18 104/105] IB/nes: Fix a compiler warning

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: <ad3efc558479ccfc1f36fcd936d2e58d1c290019.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Mon, 24 Sep 2018 22:45:21 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Sasha Levin <Alexander.Levin@...rosoft.com>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@....com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.18 104/105] IB/nes: Fix a compiler warning

On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 22:39 +0000, Sasha Levin wrote:
> The reasoning behind it was similar to the "no warnings" reasoning of
> upstream: there might be real issues hiding in the sea of "harmless"
> warnings, so we want to get rid of all of them to catch real issues.

I believe this to be a poor idea for -stable acceptance.

It's impossible to know when gcc or any other compiler
would decide to add any new warning.