Messages in this thread | | | From | Masahiro Yamada <> | Date | Wed, 23 Oct 2019 14:21:34 +0900 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] namespace: fix namespace.pl script to support relative paths |
| |
On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 5:49 AM Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@intel.com> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Masahiro Yamada [mailto:yamada.masahiro@socionext.com] > > Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2019 5:21 PM > > To: Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@intel.com> > > Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>; intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org; linux- > > kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] namespace: fix namespace.pl script to support relative paths > > > > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:30 AM Keller, Jacob E > > <jacob.e.keller@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Randy Dunlap [mailto:rdunlap@infradead.org] > > > > Sent: Friday, September 27, 2019 4:12 PM > > > > To: Keller, Jacob E <jacob.e.keller@intel.com> > > > > Cc: intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux-kbuild > > <linux- > > > > kbuild@vger.kernel.org>; Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] namespace: fix namespace.pl script to support relative paths > > > > > > > > > > > > re: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190129204319.15238-1- > > jacob.e.keller@intel.com/ > > > > > > > > Did anything happen with this patch? > > > > > > > > Please send it to linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org and > > > > Cc: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> > > > > > > > > You can also add: > > > > Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> > > > > Tested-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org> > > > > > > > > > > > > I was just about to fix this script but I decided to first see if anyone else > > > > had already done so. Thanks. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > ~Randy > > > > > > Done, thanks. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Jake > > > > > > Applied to linux/kbuild. Thanks. > > > > Great, thanks!
This scripts has been 5-year broken, and I did not see any complaint except from you. So, I wonder how many people are using this.
Nor, do I understand how to use it.
Could you teach me a bit more about this script?
Something might be missing in my mind, but I do not know how to use this script in a useful way.
It provides three checks.
[1] list_multiply_defined()
This warns multiple definition of functions.
The compiler would fail if it saw any multiple definition, so the reports from this check are all false-positive.
[2] resolve_external_references()
This warns unresolved symbols.
The compiler would fail if it saw any unresolved symbol, so the reports from this check are all false-positive, too.
[3] list_extra_externals
This warns symbols with no reference.
This potentially contains lots of false-positives. For example, the core framework provides APIs, but if all drivers are disabled, there is no user of those APIs.
I built the kernel with x86_64_defconfig, and namespacecheck provides
1400 line reports for [1]. 200 line reports for [2]. 6800 line reports for [3].
Most of these seem false-positives.
How can I use it for the code improvement?
[3] might be still useful to find 'static' candidates, but it would be difficult given the amount of the report.
-- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
| |