linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next] arm64/spinlock: fix a -Wunused-function 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]

Date:   Thu, 23 Jan 2020 16:56:15 +0000
From:   Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To:     Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
Cc:     peterz@...radead.org, longman@...hat.com, mingo@...hat.com,
        catalin.marinas@....com, clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] arm64/spinlock: fix a -Wunused-function warning

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 11:29:45AM -0500, Qian Cai wrote:
> The commit f5bfdc8e3947 ("locking/osq: Use optimized spinning loop for
> arm64") introduced a warning from Clang because vcpu_is_preempted() is
> compiled away,
> 
> kernel/locking/osq_lock.c:25:19: warning: unused function 'node_cpu'
> [-Wunused-function]
> static inline int node_cpu(struct optimistic_spin_node *node)
>                   ^
> 1 warning generated.
> 
> Since vcpu_is_preempted() had already been defined in
> include/linux/sched.h as false, just comment out the redundant macro, so
> it can still be served for the documentation purpose.
> 
> Fixes: f5bfdc8e3947 ("locking/osq: Use optimized spinning loop for arm64")
> Signed-off-by: Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h
> index 102404dc1e13..b05f82e8ba19 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/spinlock.h
> @@ -17,7 +17,8 @@
>   *
>   * See:
>   * https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200110100612.GC2827@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
> + *
> + * #define vcpu_is_preempted(cpu)	false
>   */
> -#define vcpu_is_preempted(cpu)	false

Damn, the whole point of this was to warn in the case that
vcpu_is_preempted() does get defined for arm64. Can we force it to evaluate
the macro argument instead (e.g. ({ (cpu), false; }) or something)?

Will