netdev - Re: [PATCH mlx5-next v4 1/4] PCI: Add sysfs callback to allow MSI-X table size change of SR-IOV VFs

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: <20210126092601.GE1053290@unreal>
Date:   Tue, 26 Jan 2021 11:26:01 +0200
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, Don Dutile <ddutile@...hat.com>,
        Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mlx5-next v4 1/4] PCI: Add sysfs callback to allow MSI-X
 table size change of SR-IOV VFs

On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 12:57:06AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2021-01-26 at 10:48 +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 12:20:11AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2021-01-26 at 08:01 +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 01:52:29PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, 24 Jan 2021 15:11:16 +0200 Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > > > +static int pci_enable_vfs_overlay(struct pci_dev *dev) { return 0; }
> > > > > > +static void pci_disable_vfs_overlay(struct pci_dev *dev) {}
> []
> > > $ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl -f include/linux/*.h --types=static_inline --terse --nosummary
> > > include/linux/dma-mapping.h:203: WARNING: static function definition might be better as static inline
> > > include/linux/genl_magic_func.h:55: WARNING: static function definition might be better as static inline
> > > include/linux/genl_magic_func.h:78: WARNING: static function definition might be better as static inline
> > > include/linux/kernel.h:670: WARNING: static function definition might be better as static inline
> > > include/linux/kprobes.h:213: WARNING: static function definition might be better as static inline
> > > include/linux/kprobes.h:231: WARNING: static function definition might be better as static inline
> > > include/linux/kprobes.h:511: WARNING: static function definition might be better as static inline
> > > include/linux/skb_array.h:185: WARNING: static function definition might be better as static inline
> > > include/linux/slab.h:606: WARNING: static function definition might be better as static inline
> > > include/linux/stop_machine.h:62: WARNING: static function definition might be better as static inline
> > > include/linux/vmw_vmci_defs.h:850: WARNING: static function definition might be better as static inline
> > > include/linux/zstd.h:95: WARNING: static function definition might be better as static inline
> > > include/linux/zstd.h:106: WARNING: static function definition might be better as static inline
> > >
> > > A false positive exists when __must_check is used between
> > > static and inline.  It's an unusual and IMO not a preferred use.
> >
> > Maybe just filter and ignore such functions for now?
>
> Not worth it.
>
> > Will you send proper patch or do you want me to do it?
>
> I'll do it eventually.

Thanks

>
>