On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 20:48:47 +0100
Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 11:42:10PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > Hmm, I just thought that the symbol only referred from inline asm should
> > be visible. But if it is OK for any version of supported gcc and clang,
> > I'm good to
On Fri, 7 Dec 2018 20:48:47 +0100
Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 11:42:10PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > Hmm, I just thought that the symbol only referred from inline asm should
> > be visible. But if it is OK for any version of supported gcc and clang,
> > I'm good to
On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 11:42:10PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Hmm, I just thought that the symbol only referred from inline asm should
> be visible. But if it is OK for any version of supported gcc and clang,
> I'm good to remove it. :-) (IOW, I just concerned about older gcc)
I just tried
On Fri, Dec 07, 2018 at 11:42:10PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Hmm, I just thought that the symbol only referred from inline asm should
> be visible. But if it is OK for any version of supported gcc and clang,
> I'm good to remove it. :-) (IOW, I just concerned about older gcc)
I just tried
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 15:24:48 +0100
Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 10:49:06PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > I would like to put this prototype inside arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c,
> > since that is locally used.
>
> Done.
>
> > Should we declare prototypes for __weak
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 15:24:48 +0100
Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 10:49:06PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > I would like to put this prototype inside arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c,
> > since that is locally used.
>
> Done.
>
> > Should we declare prototypes for __weak
Hi,
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 18:15:47 +0100
Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 05:25:26PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Also, preferably the prototype should be eliminated via proper ordering
> > of functions from lower level to higher levels.
>
> Well, that trampoline_handler() is
Hi,
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 18:15:47 +0100
Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 05:25:26PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Also, preferably the prototype should be eliminated via proper ordering
> > of functions from lower level to higher levels.
>
> Well, that trampoline_handler() is
On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 05:25:26PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Also, preferably the prototype should be eliminated via proper ordering
> of functions from lower level to higher levels.
Well, that trampoline_handler() is special as we call it from inline asm
and I see Masami has marked it
On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 05:25:26PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Also, preferably the prototype should be eliminated via proper ordering
> of functions from lower level to higher levels.
Well, that trampoline_handler() is special as we call it from inline asm
and I see Masami has marked it
* Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 10:49:06PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > I would like to put this prototype inside arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c,
> > since that is locally used.
>
> Done.
Also, preferably the prototype should be eliminated via proper ordering
of
* Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 10:49:06PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > I would like to put this prototype inside arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c,
> > since that is locally used.
>
> Done.
Also, preferably the prototype should be eliminated via proper ordering
of
On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 10:49:06PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> I would like to put this prototype inside arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c,
> since that is locally used.
Done.
> Should we declare prototypes for __weak functions? Anyway, we should remove
> __weak from the prototypes.
And done.
On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 10:49:06PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> I would like to put this prototype inside arch/x86/kernel/kprobes/core.c,
> since that is locally used.
Done.
> Should we declare prototypes for __weak functions? Anyway, we should remove
> __weak from the prototypes.
And done.
Hi Borislav,
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 11:11:31 +0100
Borislav Petkov wrote:
> From: Borislav Petkov
>
> ... with the goal of eventually enabling -Wmissing-prototypes by
> default. At least on x86.
>
> Make functions static where possible, otherwise add prototypes or make
> them visible through
Hi Borislav,
On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 11:11:31 +0100
Borislav Petkov wrote:
> From: Borislav Petkov
>
> ... with the goal of eventually enabling -Wmissing-prototypes by
> default. At least on x86.
>
> Make functions static where possible, otherwise add prototypes or make
> them visible through
On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 11:11 AM Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> From: Borislav Petkov
>
> ... with the goal of eventually enabling -Wmissing-prototypes by
> default. At least on x86.
>
> Make functions static where possible, otherwise add prototypes or make
> them visible through includes.
>
>
On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 11:11 AM Borislav Petkov wrote:
>
> From: Borislav Petkov
>
> ... with the goal of eventually enabling -Wmissing-prototypes by
> default. At least on x86.
>
> Make functions static where possible, otherwise add prototypes or make
> them visible through includes.
>
>
From: Borislav Petkov
... with the goal of eventually enabling -Wmissing-prototypes by
default. At least on x86.
Make functions static where possible, otherwise add prototypes or make
them visible through includes.
asm/trace/ changes courtesy of Steven Rostedt .
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov
From: Borislav Petkov
... with the goal of eventually enabling -Wmissing-prototypes by
default. At least on x86.
Make functions static where possible, otherwise add prototypes or make
them visible through includes.
asm/trace/ changes courtesy of Steven Rostedt .
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov
20 matches
Mail list logo
