linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: remove unneeded #ifdef around declarations

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]

Date:   Fri, 14 Jun 2019 15:21:27 +0200
From:   "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>
To:     Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: remove unneeded #ifdef around declarations

On 13.06.19 03:55, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> What is the point in surrounding the whole of declarations with
> ifdef like this?
> 
>   #ifdef CONFIG_FOO
>   int foo(void);
>   #endif
> 
> If CONFIG_FOO is not defined, all callers of foo() will fail
> with implicit declaration errors since the top Makefile adds
> -Werror-implicit-function-declaration to KBUILD_CFLAGS.
> 
> This breaks the build earlier when you are doing something wrong.
> That's it.

hmm, in general I like the idea of breaking the build as early as
possible. depending on your available cpu power, a kernel build can
take a while, and it could be a huge waste of time when having to
wait for link stage, just to find out about missing functions.

@linus: what's your oppinion ?


--mtx

-- 
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@...ux.net -- +49-151-27565287