netdev - Re: [PATCH] sfc: use IS_ENABLED() checks for CONFIG_SFC

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: <f38d6b22-f846-5637-d58b-2d8862bc6840@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 17 Feb 2023 16:13:59 +0000
From:   Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
        Martin Habets <habetsm.xilinx@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Alejandro Lucero <alejandro.lucero-palau@....com>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Jonathan Cooper <jonathan.s.cooper@....com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sfc: use IS_ENABLED() checks for CONFIG_SFC_SRIOV

On 17/02/2023 09:56, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> 
> One local variable has become unused after a recent change:
> 
> drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/ef100_nic.c: In function 'ef100_probe_netdev_pf':
> drivers/net/ethernet/sfc/ef100_nic.c:1155:21: error: unused variable 'net_dev' [-Werror=unused-variable]
>   struct net_device *net_dev = efx->net_dev;
>                      ^~~~~~~
> 
> The variable is still used in an #ifdef. Replace the #ifdef with
> an if(IS_ENABLED()) check that lets the compiler see where it is
> used, rather than adding another #ifdef.

So we've had Leon telling us[1] to use __maybe_unused, and you're
 saying to use IS_ENABLED() instead.  Which is right?
(And does it make any difference to build time?  I'm assuming the
 compiler is smart enough that this change doesn't affect text
 size...?)
-ed

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/cac3fa89-50a3-6de0-796c-a215400f3710@intel.com/T/#md2ecc82f18c200391dc6581ff68ff08eee9a65cf