On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 5:49 AM Keller, Jacob E <[email protected]> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Masahiro Yamada [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2019 5:21 PM > > To: Keller, Jacob E <[email protected]> > > Cc: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>; [email protected]; > > linux- > > [email protected]; linux-kbuild <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] namespace: fix namespace.pl script to support relative > > paths > > > > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:30 AM Keller, Jacob E > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Randy Dunlap [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > Sent: Friday, September 27, 2019 4:12 PM > > > > To: Keller, Jacob E <[email protected]> > > > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; > > > > linux-kbuild > > <linux- > > > > [email protected]>; Masahiro Yamada <[email protected]> > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] namespace: fix namespace.pl script to support > > > > relative paths > > > > > > > > > > > > re: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190129204319.15238-1- > > [email protected]/ > > > > > > > > Did anything happen with this patch? > > > > > > > > Please send it to [email protected] and > > > > Cc: Masahiro Yamada <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > You can also add: > > > > Acked-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]> > > > > Tested-by: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > 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
