linux-kernel - Re: [for-next][PATCH 0/3] tracing: Trigger a warning on build if a tracepoint is defined but unused

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: <20250828171346.21642d91@batman.local.home>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2025 17:13:46 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...nel.org>
To: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
 Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Mathieu Desnoyers
 <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Andrew Morton
 <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [for-next][PATCH 0/3] tracing: Trigger a warning on build if a
 tracepoint is defined but unused

On Fri, 29 Aug 2025 07:02:24 +1000
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:

> [Pretending to be Linus :-)]
> 
> So, have you fixed up the 178 new warnings you know about?  I cannot
> possibly do that, or even notify the offenders.  Please do that before
> adding this code to linux-next.
> 
> But, really, these known warnings can just make it so much harder to
> notice new ones.

Then this won't get in. I simply don't have the time to fix the current
ones. I did 20 or so, and that took me all day (which I did on a
holiday). And this work is something I'm already doing on my own time,
as my employer has other priorities for me to work on.

But it is something that is needed as there's currently nothing that
tells you that you have a tracepoint not used, and the are growing in
numbers and wasting more memory.

There is an option that needs to be enabled. Now this will get enabled
with allmodconfig or allyesconfig, but scripts that do tests could
disable it. Or I can make it a tri op that doesn't get set by one of
those (but randconfig may set it).

As for fixing the warnings, it really belongs to whoever added the
tracepoint (git blame will give you that). And would be a great project
for an intern (which I don't have any).

-- Steve