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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cba4f849-8443-405b-8318-a7208e6b80cc@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 19:27:36 -0300
From: Marilene Andrade Garcia <marilene.agarcia@...il.com>
To: Coly Li <colyli@...e.de>, Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>
Cc: Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
 Javier Carrasco <javier.carrasco.cruz@...il.com>,
 linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bcache: Fix compiler warnings

On 05/06/2024 00:40, Marilene A Garcia wrote:
> It fixes the following compiler warnings by
> using "/*" instead of "/**" in the comments
> 
> drivers/md/bcache/request.c:309: warning:
> Function parameter or struct member 'bch_data_insert'
> not described in 'CLOSURE_CALLBACK'
> 
> drivers/md/bcache/request.c:309: warning: expecting
> prototype for bch_data_insert(). Prototype was for
> CLOSURE_CALLBACK() instead
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marilene A Garcia <marilene.agarcia@...il.com>
> ---
> Hello,
> These warnings happen using GCC compiler the command 'make W=1'.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
>   drivers/md/bcache/request.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/request.c b/drivers/md/bcache/request.c
> index af345dc6fde1..457b9605aff9 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/bcache/request.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/bcache/request.c
> @@ -285,7 +285,7 @@ static CLOSURE_CALLBACK(bch_data_insert_start)
>   	}
>   }
>   
> -/**
> +/*
>    * bch_data_insert - stick some data in the cache
>    * @cl: closure pointer.
>    *

Hello,
I have realized that even though this change could fix the warning, it 
is not the correct fix to it, because it breaks the format of kernel 
function comments.

So please discard the patch.
Thank you.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ