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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAK7LNAS_xG6EAKf8o8wdBD5GBZzajW1P78GfwYgCZ3gO7xCqvg@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2021 13:50:52 +0900 From: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org> To: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net> Cc: Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>, linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/27] x86/syscalls: fix -Wmissing-prototypes warnings from COND_SYSCALL() On Sat, Feb 13, 2021 at 12:12 AM Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net> wrote: > > Could you please push this patch to Linus? Thanks. > > On 04/02/2021 15:16, Mickaël Salaün wrote: > > > > On 28/01/2021 01:50, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > >> Building kernel/sys_ni.c with W=1 omits tons of -Wmissing-prototypes > >> warnings. > >> > >> $ make W=1 kernel/sys_ni.o > >> [ snip ] > >> CC kernel/sys_ni.o > >> In file included from kernel/sys_ni.c:10: > >> ./arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h:83:14: warning: no previous prototype for '__x64_sys_io_setup' [-Wmissing-prototypes] > >> 83 | __weak long __##abi##_##name(const struct pt_regs *__unused) \ > >> | ^~ > >> ./arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h:100:2: note: in expansion of macro '__COND_SYSCALL' > >> 100 | __COND_SYSCALL(x64, sys_##name) > >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >> ./arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h:256:2: note: in expansion of macro '__X64_COND_SYSCALL' > >> 256 | __X64_COND_SYSCALL(name) \ > >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >> kernel/sys_ni.c:39:1: note: in expansion of macro 'COND_SYSCALL' > >> 39 | COND_SYSCALL(io_setup); > >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~ > >> ./arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h:83:14: warning: no previous prototype for '__ia32_sys_io_setup' [-Wmissing-prototypes] > >> 83 | __weak long __##abi##_##name(const struct pt_regs *__unused) \ > >> | ^~ > >> ./arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h:120:2: note: in expansion of macro '__COND_SYSCALL' > >> 120 | __COND_SYSCALL(ia32, sys_##name) > >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >> ./arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h:257:2: note: in expansion of macro '__IA32_COND_SYSCALL' > >> 257 | __IA32_COND_SYSCALL(name) > >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >> kernel/sys_ni.c:39:1: note: in expansion of macro 'COND_SYSCALL' > >> 39 | COND_SYSCALL(io_setup); > >> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~ > >> ... > >> > >> __SYS_STUB0() and __SYS_STUBx() defined a few lines above have forward > >> declarations. Let's do likewise for __COND_SYSCALL() to fix the > >> warnings. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org> > > > > Tested-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ux.microsoft.com> > > > > Thanks to this patch we avoid multiple emails from Intel's bot when > > adding new syscalls. :) Thanks for the reminder. I will fix the typo "omits" -> "emits" and send v2 just in case. > > > > > >> --- > >> > >> arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h | 1 + > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h > >> index a84333adeef2..80c08c7d5e72 100644 > >> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h > >> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/syscall_wrapper.h > >> @@ -80,6 +80,7 @@ extern long __ia32_sys_ni_syscall(const struct pt_regs *regs); > >> } > >> > >> #define __COND_SYSCALL(abi, name) \ > >> + __weak long __##abi##_##name(const struct pt_regs *__unused); \ > >> __weak long __##abi##_##name(const struct pt_regs *__unused) \ > >> { \ > >> return sys_ni_syscall(); \ > >> -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
Powered by blists - more mailing lists