* [PATCH] x86: coco: mark cc_mask as __maybe_unused
@ 2025-03-04 14:33 Arnd Bergmann
2025-03-04 19:55 ` Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2025-03-04 14:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, Borislav Petkov, Dave Hansen, x86,
Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan, Rick Edgecombe, Kirill A. Shutemov,
Tom Lendacky
Cc: Arnd Bergmann, H. Peter Anvin, Jason A. Donenfeld, linux-kernel
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
When extra warnings are enabled, the cc_mask definition in asm/coco.h
causes a build failure with gcc:
arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h:28:18: error: 'cc_mask' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-const-variable=]
28 | static const u64 cc_mask = 0;
Mark this one as __maybe_unused.
Fixes: a0a8d15a798b ("x86/tdx: Preserve shared bit on mprotect()")
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h
index aa6c8f8ca958..9e9204cfca6f 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ u64 cc_mkdec(u64 val);
void cc_random_init(void);
#else
#define cc_vendor (CC_VENDOR_NONE)
-static const u64 cc_mask = 0;
+static const __maybe_unused u64 cc_mask = 0;
static inline u64 cc_mkenc(u64 val)
{
--
2.39.5
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] x86: coco: mark cc_mask as __maybe_unused 2025-03-04 14:33 [PATCH] x86: coco: mark cc_mask as __maybe_unused Arnd Bergmann @ 2025-03-04 19:55 ` Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy 2025-03-05 9:02 ` Kirill A. Shutemov 2025-03-05 10:44 ` Ingo Molnar 2 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy @ 2025-03-04 19:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Arnd Bergmann, Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, Borislav Petkov, Dave Hansen, x86, Rick Edgecombe, Kirill A. Shutemov, Tom Lendacky Cc: Arnd Bergmann, H. Peter Anvin, Jason A. Donenfeld, linux-kernel On 3/4/25 6:33 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > > When extra warnings are enabled, the cc_mask definition in asm/coco.h > causes a build failure with gcc: > > arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h:28:18: error: 'cc_mask' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-const-variable=] > 28 | static const u64 cc_mask = 0; > > Mark this one as __maybe_unused. > > Fixes: a0a8d15a798b ("x86/tdx: Preserve shared bit on mprotect()") > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > --- Looks good to me. Reviewed-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com> > arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h > index aa6c8f8ca958..9e9204cfca6f 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h > @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ u64 cc_mkdec(u64 val); > void cc_random_init(void); > #else > #define cc_vendor (CC_VENDOR_NONE) > -static const u64 cc_mask = 0; > +static const __maybe_unused u64 cc_mask = 0; > > static inline u64 cc_mkenc(u64 val) > { -- Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy Linux Kernel Developer ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86: coco: mark cc_mask as __maybe_unused 2025-03-04 14:33 [PATCH] x86: coco: mark cc_mask as __maybe_unused Arnd Bergmann 2025-03-04 19:55 ` Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy @ 2025-03-05 9:02 ` Kirill A. Shutemov 2025-03-05 10:44 ` Ingo Molnar 2 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Kirill A. Shutemov @ 2025-03-05 9:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, Borislav Petkov, Dave Hansen, x86, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan, Rick Edgecombe, Tom Lendacky, Arnd Bergmann, H. Peter Anvin, Jason A. Donenfeld, linux-kernel On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 03:33:34PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > > When extra warnings are enabled, the cc_mask definition in asm/coco.h > causes a build failure with gcc: > > arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h:28:18: error: 'cc_mask' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-const-variable=] > 28 | static const u64 cc_mask = 0; > > Mark this one as __maybe_unused. > > Fixes: a0a8d15a798b ("x86/tdx: Preserve shared bit on mprotect()") > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Reviewed-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> -- Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86: coco: mark cc_mask as __maybe_unused 2025-03-04 14:33 [PATCH] x86: coco: mark cc_mask as __maybe_unused Arnd Bergmann 2025-03-04 19:55 ` Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy 2025-03-05 9:02 ` Kirill A. Shutemov @ 2025-03-05 10:44 ` Ingo Molnar 2025-03-05 22:17 ` Borislav Petkov 2025-03-10 13:50 ` Arnd Bergmann 2 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Ingo Molnar @ 2025-03-05 10:44 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, Borislav Petkov, Dave Hansen, x86, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan, Rick Edgecombe, Kirill A. Shutemov, Tom Lendacky, Arnd Bergmann, H. Peter Anvin, Jason A. Donenfeld, linux-kernel * Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> wrote: > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > > When extra warnings are enabled, the cc_mask definition in asm/coco.h > causes a build failure with gcc: > > arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h:28:18: error: 'cc_mask' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-const-variable=] > 28 | static const u64 cc_mask = 0; > > Mark this one as __maybe_unused. > > Fixes: a0a8d15a798b ("x86/tdx: Preserve shared bit on mprotect()") > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > --- > arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h > index aa6c8f8ca958..9e9204cfca6f 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h > @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ u64 cc_mkdec(u64 val); > void cc_random_init(void); > #else > #define cc_vendor (CC_VENDOR_NONE) > -static const u64 cc_mask = 0; > +static const __maybe_unused u64 cc_mask = 0; So I detest __maybe_unused with a vengeance: the 'maybe' unnecessarily inserts uncertainty & probability language into the text, while there's nothing uncertain about this interface or the code. Why cannot the compiler figure it out? Anyway, I'd suggest we change direct usage of cc_mask to a get_cc_mask() inline function instead, this will resolve the warning, plus it avoids some messy looking variable shadowing in tdx.c AFAICS: arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c:static void tdx_setup(u64 *cc_mask) Thanks, Ingo ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86: coco: mark cc_mask as __maybe_unused 2025-03-05 10:44 ` Ingo Molnar @ 2025-03-05 22:17 ` Borislav Petkov 2025-03-05 22:20 ` Borislav Petkov 2025-03-10 13:50 ` Arnd Bergmann 1 sibling, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Borislav Petkov @ 2025-03-05 22:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Arnd Bergmann, Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, Dave Hansen, x86, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan, Rick Edgecombe, Kirill A. Shutemov, Tom Lendacky, Arnd Bergmann, H. Peter Anvin, Jason A. Donenfeld, linux-kernel On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 11:44:34AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> wrote: > > > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > > > > When extra warnings are enabled, the cc_mask definition in asm/coco.h > > causes a build failure with gcc: > > > > arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h:28:18: error: 'cc_mask' defined but not used [-Werror=unused-const-variable=] > > 28 | static const u64 cc_mask = 0; > > > > Mark this one as __maybe_unused. > > > > Fixes: a0a8d15a798b ("x86/tdx: Preserve shared bit on mprotect()") > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> > > --- > > arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h > > index aa6c8f8ca958..9e9204cfca6f 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h > > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h > > @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ u64 cc_mkdec(u64 val); > > void cc_random_init(void); > > #else > > #define cc_vendor (CC_VENDOR_NONE) > > -static const u64 cc_mask = 0; > > +static const __maybe_unused u64 cc_mask = 0; > > So I detest __maybe_unused with a vengeance: the 'maybe' unnecessarily > inserts uncertainty & probability language into the text, while there's > nothing uncertain about this interface or the code. Why cannot the > compiler figure it out? > > Anyway, I'd suggest we change direct usage of cc_mask to a > get_cc_mask() inline function instead, this will resolve the warning, > plus it avoids some messy looking variable shadowing in tdx.c AFAICS: > > arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c:static void tdx_setup(u64 *cc_mask) Touch ~17 spots: $ git grep -w cc_mask arch/x86 | wc -l 17 just because of some stupid gcc extra warning switch? I say disable the gcc warning. Pfft. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86: coco: mark cc_mask as __maybe_unused 2025-03-05 22:17 ` Borislav Petkov @ 2025-03-05 22:20 ` Borislav Petkov 2025-03-05 22:45 ` Arnd Bergmann 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Borislav Petkov @ 2025-03-05 22:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Arnd Bergmann, Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, Dave Hansen, x86, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan, Rick Edgecombe, Kirill A. Shutemov, Tom Lendacky, Arnd Bergmann, H. Peter Anvin, Jason A. Donenfeld, linux-kernel On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 11:17:00PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: > just because of some stupid gcc extra warning switch? This warning has been kicked out into W1 once already for too many false positives: c9c6837d3931 ("kbuild: move -Wunused-const-variable to W=1 warning level") -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86: coco: mark cc_mask as __maybe_unused 2025-03-05 22:20 ` Borislav Petkov @ 2025-03-05 22:45 ` Arnd Bergmann 2025-03-05 22:50 ` Borislav Petkov 0 siblings, 1 reply; 11+ messages in thread From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2025-03-05 22:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Borislav Petkov, Ingo Molnar Cc: Arnd Bergmann, Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, Dave Hansen, x86, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan, Rick Edgecombe, Kirill A. Shutemov, Tom Lendacky, H. Peter Anvin, Jason A . Donenfeld, linux-kernel On Wed, Mar 5, 2025, at 23:20, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 11:17:00PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: >> >> Touch ~17 spots: >> >> $ git grep -w cc_mask arch/x86 | wc -l >> 17 >> >> just because of some stupid gcc extra warning switch? It's only one outside of CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_CC_PLATFORM, the other ones always see the 'extern' declaration. > This warning has been kicked out into W1 once already for too many false > positives: > > c9c6837d3931 ("kbuild: move -Wunused-const-variable to W=1 warning level") Yes, that was me. We have now come to the point where only about a dozen instances are left and I resubmitted the remaining patches for most of them. There is a twist here: clang by default warns about unused const variables in .c files but not in headers, while gcc doesn't warn about them at all unless it's explictly enabled, and then it warns about both of them. Newer gcc versions have a distinct -Wunused-const-variable=1 for the clang behavior and -Wunused-const-variable=2 that warns for both, so we could reasonably decide to enable the =1 version by default and leave the =2 version for W=2. On the other hand, most of the users of 'static const' variables in headers are rather dumb and should just be moved into the file that uses them, or they can be replaced with a #define or an enum. In this case, the only user is a macro: #define _PAGE_CC (_AT(pteval_t, cc_mask)) so maybe '#define cc_mask 0' would be appropriate. Arnd ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86: coco: mark cc_mask as __maybe_unused 2025-03-05 22:45 ` Arnd Bergmann @ 2025-03-05 22:50 ` Borislav Petkov 2025-03-06 5:38 ` Huang, Kai 2025-03-10 13:10 ` Arnd Bergmann 0 siblings, 2 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Borislav Petkov @ 2025-03-05 22:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Ingo Molnar, Arnd Bergmann, Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, Dave Hansen, x86, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan, Rick Edgecombe, Kirill A. Shutemov, Tom Lendacky, H. Peter Anvin, Jason A . Donenfeld, linux-kernel On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 11:45:11PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > There is a twist here: clang by default warns about unused const > variables in .c files but not in headers, while gcc doesn't What is the point of this warning, do you know? Someone defines a const, forgets to use it and? Oh big deal. This should be a -Wunused anyway, no? I must be missing something here... > warn about them at all unless it's explictly enabled, and then > it warns about both of them. Newer gcc versions have a distinct > -Wunused-const-variable=1 for the clang behavior and > -Wunused-const-variable=2 that warns for both, so we could > reasonably decide to enable the =1 version by default and > leave the =2 version for W=2. > > On the other hand, most of the users of 'static const' variables > in headers are rather dumb and should just be moved into the > file that uses them, or they can be replaced with a #define > or an enum. > > In this case, the only user is a macro: > #define _PAGE_CC (_AT(pteval_t, cc_mask)) > > so maybe '#define cc_mask 0' would be appropriate. Sounds a lot better to me. Thx. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86: coco: mark cc_mask as __maybe_unused 2025-03-05 22:50 ` Borislav Petkov @ 2025-03-06 5:38 ` Huang, Kai 2025-03-10 13:10 ` Arnd Bergmann 1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Huang, Kai @ 2025-03-06 5:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: bp@alien8.de, arnd@arndb.de Cc: arnd@kernel.org, Edgecombe, Rick P, mingo@kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, Jason@zx2c4.com, hpa@zytor.com, mingo@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com, thomas.lendacky@amd.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > > warn about them at all unless it's explictly enabled, and then > > it warns about both of them. Newer gcc versions have a distinct > > -Wunused-const-variable=1 for the clang behavior and > > -Wunused-const-variable=2 that warns for both, so we could > > reasonably decide to enable the =1 version by default and > > leave the =2 version for W=2. > > > > On the other hand, most of the users of 'static const' variables > > in headers are rather dumb and should just be moved into the > > file that uses them, or they can be replaced with a #define > > or an enum. > > > > In this case, the only user is a macro: > > #define _PAGE_CC (_AT(pteval_t, cc_mask)) > > > > so maybe '#define cc_mask 0' would be appropriate. > > Sounds a lot better to me. > I actually tried this with CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_CC_PLATFORM off yesterday but got below error: $ make -j$(nproc) mkdir -p /work/enabling/src/linux/tools/objtool && make O=/work/enabling/src/linux subdir=tools/objtool --no-print-directory -C objtool CALL scripts/checksyscalls.sh INSTALL libsubcmd_headers CC drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.o CC drivers/char/tpm/tpmrm-dev.o CC drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-space.o CC drivers/char/tpm/tpm-sysfs.o In file included from ./arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable.h:23, from ./arch/x86/include/asm/tlbflush.h:16, from ./arch/x86/include/asm/uaccess.h:17, from ./include/linux/uaccess.h:12, from ./include/linux/sched/task.h:13, from ./include/linux/sched/signal.h:9, from ./include/linux/rcuwait.h:6, from ./include/linux/percpu-rwsem.h:7, from ./include/linux/fs.h:33, from ./include/linux/tpm.h:23, from drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h:27, from drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c:14: drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c: In function ‘tpm2_find_cc’: ./arch/x86/include/asm/coco.h:28:17: error: expected identifier or ‘(’ before numeric constant 28 | #define cc_mask 0 | ^ drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c:813:13: note: in expansion of macro ‘cc_mask’ 813 | u32 cc_mask; | ^~~~~~~ drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c:816:17: error: lvalue required as left operand of assignment 816 | cc_mask = 1 << TPM2_CC_ATTR_VENDOR | GENMASK(15, 0); | ^ Rename the local variable 'cc_mask' in drivers/char/tpm/tpm2-cmd.c fix the build, but I think the real issue is the 'cc_mask' in asm/coco.h is too common to be a global visible variable/macro. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86: coco: mark cc_mask as __maybe_unused 2025-03-05 22:50 ` Borislav Petkov 2025-03-06 5:38 ` Huang, Kai @ 2025-03-10 13:10 ` Arnd Bergmann 1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2025-03-10 13:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Ingo Molnar, Arnd Bergmann, Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, Dave Hansen, x86, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan, Rick Edgecombe, Kirill A. Shutemov, Tom Lendacky, H. Peter Anvin, Jason A . Donenfeld, linux-kernel On Wed, Mar 5, 2025, at 23:50, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 11:45:11PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> There is a twist here: clang by default warns about unused const >> variables in .c files but not in headers, while gcc doesn't > > What is the point of this warning, do you know? > > Someone defines a const, forgets to use it and? Oh big deal. This should be > a -Wunused anyway, no? > > I must be missing something here... We turned on -Wunused a while ago for default builds after all the -Wunused-variable warnings got addressed, but instead turned off -Wunused-const-variable and -Wunused-but-set-variable unless W=1 is set while there are still existing warnings. In my opinion, there is little difference between unused const and non-const variables, the reason that gcc treats them differently seems to be from common c++ coding style advocating for them to be used in place of macros. This is the case here, but most of the warnings it actually shows are for mistakes where some variable is in the wrong #ifdef block or the only user got removed. >> In this case, the only user is a macro: >> #define _PAGE_CC (_AT(pteval_t, cc_mask)) >> >> so maybe '#define cc_mask 0' would be appropriate. > > Sounds a lot better to me. Too bad that did not work. This version is also a bit ugly: diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h index c90e9c51edb7..f31c1a31742d 100644 --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/pgtable_types.h @@ -179,7 +179,11 @@ enum page_cache_mode { }; #endif +#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_CC_PLATFORM #define _PAGE_CC (_AT(pteval_t, cc_mask)) +#else +#define _PAGE_CC (_AT(pteval_t, 0)) +#endif #define _PAGE_ENC (_AT(pteval_t, sme_me_mask)) #define _PAGE_CACHE_MASK (_PAGE_PWT | _PAGE_PCD | _PAGE_PAT) so I'll just follow Ingo's earlier suggestion for the v2 patch. Arnd ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] x86: coco: mark cc_mask as __maybe_unused 2025-03-05 10:44 ` Ingo Molnar 2025-03-05 22:17 ` Borislav Petkov @ 2025-03-10 13:50 ` Arnd Bergmann 1 sibling, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2025-03-10 13:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ingo Molnar, Arnd Bergmann Cc: Thomas Gleixner, Ingo Molnar, Borislav Petkov, Dave Hansen, x86, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan, Rick Edgecombe, Kirill A. Shutemov, Tom Lendacky, H. Peter Anvin, Jason A . Donenfeld, linux-kernel On Wed, Mar 5, 2025, at 11:44, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> wrote: > >> @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ u64 cc_mkdec(u64 val); >> void cc_random_init(void); >> #else >> #define cc_vendor (CC_VENDOR_NONE) >> -static const u64 cc_mask = 0; >> +static const __maybe_unused u64 cc_mask = 0; > > So I detest __maybe_unused with a vengeance: the 'maybe' unnecessarily > inserts uncertainty & probability language into the text, while there's > nothing uncertain about this interface or the code. Why cannot the > compiler figure it out? Right, I'm also trying to remove a lot of the __maybe_unused annotations in places like power management and device_id tables where we now have better solutions in place. > Anyway, I'd suggest we change direct usage of cc_mask to a > get_cc_mask() inline function instead, this will resolve the warning, > plus it avoids some messy looking variable shadowing in tdx.c AFAICS: > > arch/x86/coco/tdx/tdx.c:static void tdx_setup(u64 *cc_mask) I've sent a v2 now. Arnd ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-03-10 13:50 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 11+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2025-03-04 14:33 [PATCH] x86: coco: mark cc_mask as __maybe_unused Arnd Bergmann 2025-03-04 19:55 ` Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy 2025-03-05 9:02 ` Kirill A. Shutemov 2025-03-05 10:44 ` Ingo Molnar 2025-03-05 22:17 ` Borislav Petkov 2025-03-05 22:20 ` Borislav Petkov 2025-03-05 22:45 ` Arnd Bergmann 2025-03-05 22:50 ` Borislav Petkov 2025-03-06 5:38 ` Huang, Kai 2025-03-10 13:10 ` Arnd Bergmann 2025-03-10 13:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox