linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol.c: move mem_cgroup_id_get_many under CONFIG

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:   Tue, 17 Dec 2019 16:13:43 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To:     Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
Cc:     Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>,
        Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@...esas.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: memcontrol.c: move mem_cgroup_id_get_many under
 CONFIG_MMU

On Tue 17-12-19 10:04:36, Qian Cai wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Dec 17, 2019, at 9:46 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
> > 
> > yes, I would just ignore this warning. Btw. it seems that this is
> > enabled by default for -Wall. Is this useful for kernel builds at
> > all? Does it realistically help discovering real issues? If not then
> > can we simply blacklist it?
> 
> -Wunused-function is useful in-general as it caught many dead code
> that some commits left unintentionally with real-world configs.

I do understand the general purpose of the warning. I am simply not sure
the kernel tree is a good candidate with a huge number of different
config combinations that might easily result in warnings which would
tend to result in even more ifdeferry than we have.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs