linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] watchdog/hardlockup: avoid unused-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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <CAD=FV=WL5JjwbZ86De1GY_0-_j4C0emP652z0ZanDfv-qikeaw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 4 Aug 2023 07:03:04 -0700
From:   Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@...il.com>,
        Lecopzer Chen <lecopzer.chen@...iatek.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] watchdog/hardlockup: avoid unused-function warning

Hi,

On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 6:28 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
>
> The newly added hardlockup_all_cpu_backtrace_proc_handler() function is defined
> in some configurations that don't actually call it:
>
> kernel/watchdog.c:112:12: error: 'hardlockup_all_cpu_backtrace_proc_handler' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-function]
>   112 | static int hardlockup_all_cpu_backtrace_proc_handler(struct ctl_table *table, int write,
>       |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Hide the definition when either CONFIG_SMP or CONFIG_SYSCTL are disabled and
> the function is not actually needed.
>
> Fixes: 838b3b76220d5 ("watchdog/hardlockup: avoid large stack frames in watchdog_hardlockup_check()")
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> ---
>  kernel/watchdog.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

Thanks for the fix. In this case I'll assume that Andrew will drop the
v2 of my patch and replace it with v4 [1], which shouldn't have this
issue.

[4] https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230804065935.v4.2.I501ab68cb926ee33a7c87e063d207abf09b9943c@changeid