[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a47312ad-8d62-b740-49cd-d1065bb76d76@digikod.net>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 12:48:13 +0100
From: Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ikod.net>
To: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
x86@...nel.org, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mickaël Salaün <mic@...ux.microsoft.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] x86/syscalls: fix -Wmissing-prototypes warnings from
COND_SYSCALL()
Hi Masahiro,
What is the status of this patch? Could you please push it to -next?
This would avoid emails from lkp:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-security-module/202103191423.Jl0jVzfL-lkp@intel.com/
Thanks,
Mickaël
On 01/03/2021 14:15, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Building kernel/sys_ni.c with W=1 emits 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>
> ---
>
> 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(); \
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists