linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf tests: Fix compile failure on do_sort

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 08 Aug 2013 23:09:48 -0400
From:	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
CC:	acme@...stprotocols.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf tests: Fix compile failure on do_sort_something

On 8/8/13 1:58 AM, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 08/08/13 00:59, David Ahern wrote:
>> Commit b55ae0a9 added code-reading.c which fails to compile on Fedora 16
>> with compiler version:
>> $ gcc --version
>> gcc (GCC) 4.6.3 20120306 (Red Hat 4.6.3-2)
>>
>> Failure message is:
>>
>> tests/code-reading.c: In function ‘do_sort_something’:
>> tests/code-reading.c:305:13: error: stack protector not protecting local variables: variable length buffer [-Werror=stack-protector]
>> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
>> make: *** [/tmp/junk/tests/code-reading.o] Error 1
>> make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>>
>> Signed-off-by: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
>> Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
>> Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
>> ---
>>   tools/perf/tests/code-reading.c |   11 +++++------
>>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/perf/tests/code-reading.c b/tools/perf/tests/code-reading.c
>> index 8e0943b..4bde8be 100644
>> --- a/tools/perf/tests/code-reading.c
>> +++ b/tools/perf/tests/code-reading.c
>> @@ -304,15 +304,14 @@ static int comp(const void *a, const void *b)
>>
>>   static void do_sort_something(void)
>>   {
>> -	size_t sz = 40960;
>> -	int buf[sz], i;
>> +	int buf[40960], i;
>>
>> -	for (i = 0; i < (int)sz; i++)
>> -		buf[i] = sz - i - 1;
>> +	for (i = 0; i < (int)sizeof(buf); i++)
>
>
> Should that be ARRAY_SIZE not sizeof

oops, yes it should.

David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/