netdev - Re: [1/4 v2] Remove unused zero-copy code from velocity NIC driver.

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: <20090723.155855.108555685.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 23 Jul 2009 15:58:55 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	davej@...hat.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [1/4 v2] Remove unused zero-copy code from velocity NIC driver.

From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 12:33:22 -0700 (PDT)

> Ok, all applied to net-next-2.6, thanks.

Ok, now we have a stinking pile of poo situation when one tries to
compile the velocity driver without CONFIG_PM defined.

First we hit:

drivers/net/via-velocity.c: In function ‘velocity_init_module’:
drivers/net/via-velocity.c:3303: error: implicit declaration of function ‘velocity_register_notifier’
drivers/net/via-velocity.c:3306: error: implicit declaration of function ‘velocity_unregister_notifier’

Because the whole CONFIG_PM + CONFIG_INET ifdeffery around these functions
was missed up.  Simple enough to fix, but then we get:

drivers/net/via-velocity.c:2957: warning: ‘velocity_suspend’ defined but not used
drivers/net/via-velocity.c:3026: warning: ‘velocity_resume’ defined but not used

Fine, let's ifdef protect these two functions with CONFIG_PM:

drivers/net/via-velocity.c:2853: warning: ‘velocity_set_wol’ defined but not used
drivers/net/via-velocity.c:2939: warning: ‘velocity_save_context’ defined but not used
drivers/net/via-velocity.c:3001: warning: ‘velocity_restore_context’ defined but not used

And at this point I really give up Dave.  This whole thing to move
functions around to avoid forward decls has created a worse problem
than it solved.

Unless you can fix this, like, immediately.  I want to revert.

This is keeping me from pulling more work into my net-next-2.6
tree.