netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 01/13] net/smc: first part of add link processing as SMC client

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: <20200502.163837.822343488746704553.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Sat, 02 May 2020 16:38:37 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     kgraul@...ux.ibm.com
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, raspl@...ux.ibm.com,
        ubraun@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 01/13] net/smc: first part of add link
 processing as SMC client

From: Karsten Graul <kgraul@...ux.ibm.com>
Date: Sat,  2 May 2020 14:35:40 +0200

> +static void smc_llc_process_cli_add_link(struct smc_link_group *lgr)
> +{
> +	struct smc_llc_qentry *qentry;
> +
> +	qentry = smc_llc_flow_qentry_clr(&lgr->llc_flow_lcl);
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&lgr->llc_conf_mutex);
> +	smc_llc_cli_add_link(qentry->link, qentry);
> +	mutex_unlock(&lgr->llc_conf_mutex);
> +}
> +
>  /* worker to process an add link message */

You must make sure the compilation succeeds without warnings after each
and every patch in your patch series.

Here you are adding a static function which is completely unused so I know
the compiler will warn without even build testing this patch.

And this was done in the previous patch series as well, which I will
fix up right now:

net/smc/smc_llc.c:544:12: warning: ‘smc_llc_alloc_alt_link’ defined but not used [-Wunused-function]
 static int smc_llc_alloc_alt_link(struct smc_link_group *lgr,
            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I get the feeling, seeing all of this, that you are splitting up the
patch set properly only because I firmly required you to do so.  This
effort looks half hearted and being done reluctantly.

Please clean all of this up and submit these changes cleanly and
properly, thank you.