netdev - Re: [PATCH] netfilter: ctnetlink: add more #ifdef around unused code

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: <20160418181659.GA2427@salvia>
Date:	Mon, 18 Apr 2016 20:16:59 +0200
From:	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
	Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	Ken-ichirou MATSUZAWA <chamaken@...il.com>,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, coreteam@...filter.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netfilter: ctnetlink: add more #ifdef around unused code

On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 10:17:43PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> A recent patch removed many 'inline' annotations for static
> functions in this file, which has caused warnings for functions
> that are not used in a given configuration, in particular when
> CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK_EVENTS is disabled:
> 
> nf_conntrack_netlink.c:572:15: 'ctnetlink_timestamp_size' defined but not used
> nf_conntrack_netlink.c:546:15: 'ctnetlink_acct_size' defined but not used
> nf_conntrack_netlink.c:339:12: 'ctnetlink_label_size' defined but not used

Arnd, thanks for the fix.

I'm planning to push this though:

http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/610820/

This is restoring the inlines for the size calculation functions, but
I think that's ok. They are rather small and they're called from the
event notification path (ie. packet path), so the compiler just place
them out of the way when not needed and we calm down the gcc warning.

Thanks!