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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <48DF011A-3074-422C-BFBA-1A9F2EF4A7BA@lca.pw>
Date:   Thu, 23 Jan 2020 12:31:25 -0500
From:   Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
To:     Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
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 Jan 23, 2020, at 11:56 AM, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> 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)?

Actually, static inline should be better.

#define vcpu_is_preempted vcpu_is_preempted
static inline bool vcpu_is_preempted(int cpu)
{
	return false;
}