[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4DE2F9BA.5030802@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 10:58:18 +0900
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: linux@...blig.org
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sparse build breakage with 903c0c7cdc21f2ccb7562a7bbc70289c0c2b16ad
(2011/05/29 9:38), Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> Hi Kosaki,
> I'm getting a problem when running the current (5dbe0af47f8a8f968bac2991c3ec974c6e3eaabc)
> kernel tree through sparse, and I think it's down to an
> interaction between your commit
>
> 903c0c7cdc21f2ccb7562a7bbc70289c0c2b16ad sparse: define dummy BUILD_BUG_ON definition for sparse
>
> and the __module_param_call code in moduleparam.h
>
> The error is:
> init/main.c:643:1: error: Syntax error in unary expression
>
> core_param(initcall_debug, initcall_debug, bool, 0644);
>
> this calls __module_param_call which is defined as:
>
>
> #define __module_param_call(prefix, name, ops, arg, isbool, perm) \
> /* Default value instead of permissions? */ \
> static int __param_perm_check_##name __attribute__((unused)) = \
> BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO((perm) < 0 || (perm) > 0777 || ((perm) & 2)) \
> + BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(sizeof(""prefix) > MAX_PARAM_PREFIX_LEN); \
> static const char __param_str_##name[] = prefix #name; \
> static struct kernel_param __moduleparam_const __param_##name \
> __used \
> __attribute__ ((unused,__section__ ("__param"),aligned(sizeof(void *)))) \
> = { __param_str_##name, ops, perm, isbool ? KPARAM_ISBOOL : 0, \
> { arg } }
>
> which ends up with a postprocessed line of:
>
> static inline void __check_initcall_debug(void) {; }; static int __param_perm_check_initcall_debug __attribute__((unused)) = +; static const char __param_str_initcall_debug[] = "" "initcall_debug"; static struct kernel_param const __param_initcall_debug __attribute__((__used__)) __attribute__ ((unused,__section__ ("__param"),aligned(sizeof(void *)))) = { __param_str_initcall_debug, ¶m_ops_bool, 0644, __builtin_types_compatible_p(typeof(initcall_debug), typeof(bool)) ? 2 : 0, { &initcall_debug } };
>
> Note the '+;' being assigned to __param_perm_check_initcall_debug
>
> So I think your dummy BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO's needs to have a value:
>
> The following diff seems to fix it, but I've not let
> a fuller sparse run complete yet:
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/kernel.h b/include/linux/kernel.h
> index fb0e732..953352a 100644
> --- a/include/linux/kernel.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kernel.h
> @@ -671,8 +671,8 @@ struct sysinfo {
>
> #ifdef __CHECKER__
> #define BUILD_BUG_ON_NOT_POWER_OF_2(n)
> -#define BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(e)
> -#define BUILD_BUG_ON_NULL(e)
> +#define BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(e) (0)
> +#define BUILD_BUG_ON_NULL(e) ((void*)0)
> #define BUILD_BUG_ON(condition)
> #else /* __CHECKER__ */
>
Hi David,
Right you are. Can you please send a formal patch and append following line?
Reviewed-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Thanks.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists