netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: dsa: sja1105: suppress -Wmissing-prototypes in sja1105_static

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: <20200531003821.GA897737@lunn.ch>
Date:   Sun, 31 May 2020 02:38:21 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc:     f.fainelli@...il.com, vivien.didelot@...il.com,
        davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: dsa: sja1105: suppress
 -Wmissing-prototypes in sja1105_static_config.c

On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 01:29:52PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
> 
> Newer compilers complain with W=1 builds that there are non-static
> functions defined in sja1105_static_config.c that don't have a
> prototype, because their prototype is defined in sja1105.h which this
> translation unit does not include.
> 
> I don't entirely understand what is the point of these warnings, since
> in principle there's nothing wrong with that.

Hi Vladimir

The issue here is that the header might have a typo and have a
different signature than the function itself. The caller than passes
the parameters in the wrong way. Best case it segfault/Opps, but it
can introduce subtle bugs which are hard to find.

    Andrew