linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: fix the build warning

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

Date:	Fri, 20 Sep 2013 23:32:29 +0900
From:	Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>
To:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
Cc:	James Bottomley <jbottomley@...allels.com>,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
	Zhi Yong Wu <zwu.kernel@...il.com>,
	"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel mlist <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Zhi Yong Wu <wuzhy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Douglas Gilbert <dgilbert@...erlog.com>,
	Antonio Alecrim Jr <antonio.alecrim@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: fix the build warning

2013/9/20 Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>:
> On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 23:49 +0900, Akinobu Mita wrote:
>> 2013/8/22 James Bottomley <jbottomley@...allels.com>:
>> > On Thu, 2013-08-22 at 21:42 +0900, Akinobu Mita wrote:
>> >> Unfortunately, this warning isn't fixed in linux-next, either.
>> >> Paul Bolle also sent a patch that fixes the same warning in a little
>> >> bit different way.
>> >
>> > Well, it is and it isn't.  Whether you see the warning seems to depend
>> > on how gcc was built.  My take is that an impossible default case just
>> > to keep some versions of gcc quiet is a bit pointless.
>>
>> As Joe said in the other reply, scsi_debug_guard could be a negative
>> value (scsi_debug_guard > 1 is only prohibited).  So this warning
>> does not seem a false positive.
>
> I too think that GCC is correct here. Perhaps the people not seeing this
> warning don't have CONFIG_SCSI_DEBUG set.
>
> A week ago Antonia also submitted a patch to silence this warning
> ( https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/13/649 ). That's at least the third time
> someone tried to silence it since it got introduced in the v3.11 cycle.
>
> Akinobu, could you please say how you'd like this warning to be
> silenced? Or is an actual fix queued somewhere?

Yesterday, I sent a patch set which includes two fixes for this issue.
I wish this to be merged and I'll do my best.

http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=137950732530325&w=2
http://marc.info/?l=linux-scsi&m=137950732530326&w=2

The first one prevents scsi_debug_guard from being a negative value by
changing the type of scsi_debug_guard to 'unsigned int'.

The second one is actually titled sparse warning fix, but it also silences
this GCC warning by chaning from switch statement to if/else statements.
--
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/