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  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, 21 May 2020 11:30:51 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <>
To:     Will Deacon <>
Cc:     Sudeep Holla <>,
        Linux ARM <>,
        Catalin Marinas <>,
        Mark Rutland <>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <>,
        Steven Price <>,,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] firmware: smccc: Add basic SMCCC v1.2 +
 ARCH_SOC_ID support

On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 11:17 AM Will Deacon <> wrote:
> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 11:06:23AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 10:11 AM Sudeep Holla <> wrote:
> > Note that the warning should come up for either W=1 or C=1, and I also
> > think that
> > new code should generally be written sparse-clean and have no warnings with
> > 'make C=1' as a rule.
> Fair enough. Is anybody working on a tree-wide sweep for this, like we've
> done for other things such as zero-length arrays? If so, I can start
> enforcing this in the arch code as well (I haven't been so far, even though
> I do run sparse on every commit).

I've done some work on that a few years ago, and there are always
some cleanup patches for C=1 and W=1 warnings, most recently
with an increase from Huawei's automated build testing + manual

I have not looked in a while, but it always seemed to be somewhere
between "too much to do by myself" and "small enough that it should
really be done" as build warnings go.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists