linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next] platform: surface: fix non-PM

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:   Sun, 13 Dec 2020 16:53:47 -0800
From:   Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@...il.com>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] platform: surface: fix non-PM_SLEEP build warnings

On 12/12/20 11:07 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2020 at 7:05 PM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
>> On 12/12/20 5:24 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 9:20 PM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
>>>>  static int surface_gpe_suspend(struct device *dev)
>>>
>>> Perhaps __maybe_unused ?
>>
>> Yes, I am aware of that option.
>> I don't know why it would be preferred though.
> 
> Here [1] is the rationale behind annotation vs. ifdeffery.
> 
> [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/732981/
>
Thanks for the link.  I'll send a v2.

Could we add that to the Linux BKP (Best Known Practices)
document?


-- 
~Randy