When building the kernel with Clang, some disabled warnings appear
because this Makefile overrides KBUILD_CFLAGS for x86{,_64}. Add them to
this list so that the build is clean again.
-Wpointer-sign was disabled for the whole kernel before the beginning
of git history.
-Waddress-of-packed-member
On 9 August 2018 at 16:50, Eric Snowberg wrote:
> Commit d64934019f6c ("x86/efi: Use efi_exit_boot_services()")
> introduced a regression on systems with large memory maps
> causing them to hang on boot. The first "goto get_map" that was removed
> from exit_boot insured there was enough room for t
> On Oct 12, 2018, at 6:42 AM, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
>
> The result of in_compat_syscall() can be pictured as:
>
> x86 platform:
>---
>| Arch\syscall | 64-bit | ia32 | x32|
>|
Reading xfrm (ipsec) code I've found such code:
: #ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
: if (in_compat_syscall())
: return -EOPNOTSUPP;
: #endif
While I can read that it's false on native i386, it's a bit misleading
and in result it's better to introduce a helper for that.
Grepping other
Now that in_compat_syscall() == false on native i686, it's possible to
remove some ifdeffery and no more needed helpers.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Safonov
---
drivers/firmware/efi/efivars.c | 16
kernel/time/time.c | 2 +-
net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c | 2 --
net/xfr
The result of in_compat_syscall() can be pictured as:
x86 platform:
---
| Arch\syscall | 64-bit | ia32 | x32|
|-|
| x86_64 | false | true | true |
|-
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 11:46:55AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 05:36:38PM +0800, Chao Fan wrote:
>> Prefer to compile out entire functions, rather than portions of functions or
>> portions of expressions. Rather than putting an ifdef in an expression,
>> factor
>> out p
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 05:36:38PM +0800, Chao Fan wrote:
> Prefer to compile out entire functions, rather than portions of functions or
> portions of expressions. Rather than putting an ifdef in an expression,
> factor
> out part or all of the expression into a separate helper function and apply
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 12:57:08PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 04:41:17PM +0800, Chao Fan wrote:
[...]
>> + * If ACPI20 table not found, but ACPI table found,
>> + * use the ACPI table and return true.
>> + * If neither ACPI table nor A
