netdev - Re: [PATCH -next] bpf: remove set but not used variable 'dst

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: <8855e82a-88d0-8d1e-e5e0-47e781f9653c@huawei.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Apr 2020 15:52:10 +0800
From:   maowenan <maowenan@...wei.com>
To:     Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
CC:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Martin Lau <kafai@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>,
        "john.fastabend@...il.com" <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        "kpsingh@...omium.org" <kpsingh@...omium.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] bpf: remove set but not used variable 'dst_known'

On 2020/4/15 15:23, Song Liu wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Apr 14, 2020, at 6:37 PM, maowenan <maowenan@...wei.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 2020/4/15 6:05, Song Liu wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Apr 13, 2020, at 4:37 AM, Mao Wenan <maowenan@...wei.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Fixes gcc '-Wunused-but-set-variable' warning:
>>>>
>>>> kernel/bpf/verifier.c:5603:18: warning: variable ‘dst_known’
>>>> set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
>>>>
>>>> It is not used since commit f1174f77b50c ("bpf/verifier:
>>>> rework value tracking")
>>>
>>> The fix makes sense. But I think f1174f77b50c introduced dst_known, 
>>> so this statement is not accurate. 
>>>
>> thanks for review, yes, f1174f77b50c introduced dst_known, and below commit
>> doesn't deference variable dst_known. So I send v2 later?
>> 3f50f132d840 ("bpf: Verifier, do explicit ALU32 bounds tracking")
> 
> I don't think we need to back port this to stable. So it is OK not to 
> include Fixes tag. We can just remove this statement in the commit log.
> 
> bpf-next is not open yet. Please send v2 when bpf-next is open. 
> 
> Thanks,
> Song
> 
OK, I will do that.