| Message ID | 20211013172847.1196305-1-keescook@chromium.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Mainlined |
| Commit | 86dd9fd52e1449084c58c1ebb1f099a2ccc85091 |
| Headers | show |
| Series | LSM: Avoid warnings about potentially unused hook variables | expand |
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 1:31 PM Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote: > > Building with W=1 shows many unused const variable warnings. These can > be silenced, as we're well aware of their being potentially unused: > > ./include/linux/lsm_hook_defs.h:36:18: error: 'ptrace_access_check_default' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-const-variable=] > 36 | LSM_HOOK(int, 0, ptrace_access_check, struct task_struct *child, > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > security/security.c:706:32: note: in definition of macro 'LSM_RET_DEFAULT' > 706 | #define LSM_RET_DEFAULT(NAME) (NAME##_default) > | ^~~~ > security/security.c:711:9: note: in expansion of macro 'DECLARE_LSM_RET_DEFAULT_int' > 711 | DECLARE_LSM_RET_DEFAULT_##RET(DEFAULT, NAME) > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > ./include/linux/lsm_hook_defs.h:36:1: note: in expansion of macro 'LSM_HOOK' > 36 | LSM_HOOK(int, 0, ptrace_access_check, struct task_struct *child, > | ^~~~~~~~ > > Cc: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> > Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com> > Cc: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> > Cc: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> > Cc: KP Singh <kpsingh@chromium.org> > Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/202110131608.zms53FPR-lkp@intel.com/ > Fixes: 98e828a0650f ("security: Refactor declaration of LSM hooks") > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> > --- > security/security.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Looks reasonable to me, thanks Kees. Unless James wants to pick this up for the security tree, I can pull this into the SElinux tree with the io_uring change which is causing the testing robot to complain. Acked-by: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> > diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c > index 9ffa9e9c5c55..462f14354c2c 100644 > --- a/security/security.c > +++ b/security/security.c > @@ -706,7 +706,7 @@ static int lsm_superblock_alloc(struct super_block *sb) > #define LSM_RET_DEFAULT(NAME) (NAME##_default) > #define DECLARE_LSM_RET_DEFAULT_void(DEFAULT, NAME) > #define DECLARE_LSM_RET_DEFAULT_int(DEFAULT, NAME) \ > - static const int LSM_RET_DEFAULT(NAME) = (DEFAULT); > + static const int __maybe_unused LSM_RET_DEFAULT(NAME) = (DEFAULT); > #define LSM_HOOK(RET, DEFAULT, NAME, ...) \ > DECLARE_LSM_RET_DEFAULT_##RET(DEFAULT, NAME) > > -- > 2.30.2 -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com
On Wed, 13 Oct 2021, Paul Moore wrote: > Looks reasonable to me, thanks Kees. Unless James wants to pick this > up for the security tree, I can pull this into the SElinux tree with > the io_uring change which is causing the testing robot to complain. > > Acked-by: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> Sounds good. Acked-by: James Morris <jamorris@linux.microsoft.com>
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 6:01 PM James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> wrote: > On Wed, 13 Oct 2021, Paul Moore wrote: > > > Looks reasonable to me, thanks Kees. Unless James wants to pick this > > up for the security tree, I can pull this into the SElinux tree with > > the io_uring change which is causing the testing robot to complain. > > > > Acked-by: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> > > Sounds good. > > Acked-by: James Morris <jamorris@linux.microsoft.com> I just merged this into selinux/next, thanks everyone!
diff --git a/security/security.c b/security/security.c index 9ffa9e9c5c55..462f14354c2c 100644 --- a/security/security.c +++ b/security/security.c @@ -706,7 +706,7 @@ static int lsm_superblock_alloc(struct super_block *sb) #define LSM_RET_DEFAULT(NAME) (NAME##_default) #define DECLARE_LSM_RET_DEFAULT_void(DEFAULT, NAME) #define DECLARE_LSM_RET_DEFAULT_int(DEFAULT, NAME) \ - static const int LSM_RET_DEFAULT(NAME) = (DEFAULT); + static const int __maybe_unused LSM_RET_DEFAULT(NAME) = (DEFAULT); #define LSM_HOOK(RET, DEFAULT, NAME, ...) \ DECLARE_LSM_RET_DEFAULT_##RET(DEFAULT, NAME)
Building with W=1 shows many unused const variable warnings. These can be silenced, as we're well aware of their being potentially unused: ./include/linux/lsm_hook_defs.h:36:18: error: 'ptrace_access_check_default' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-const-variable=] 36 | LSM_HOOK(int, 0, ptrace_access_check, struct task_struct *child, | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ security/security.c:706:32: note: in definition of macro 'LSM_RET_DEFAULT' 706 | #define LSM_RET_DEFAULT(NAME) (NAME##_default) | ^~~~ security/security.c:711:9: note: in expansion of macro 'DECLARE_LSM_RET_DEFAULT_int' 711 | DECLARE_LSM_RET_DEFAULT_##RET(DEFAULT, NAME) | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ./include/linux/lsm_hook_defs.h:36:1: note: in expansion of macro 'LSM_HOOK' 36 | LSM_HOOK(int, 0, ptrace_access_check, struct task_struct *child, | ^~~~~~~~ Cc: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org> Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com> Cc: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com> Cc: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com> Cc: KP Singh <kpsingh@chromium.org> Cc: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/202110131608.zms53FPR-lkp@intel.com/ Fixes: 98e828a0650f ("security: Refactor declaration of LSM hooks") Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> --- security/security.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)