linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] NVMe: silence GCC warning on 32 bit

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]

Message-ID: <1399533171.19191.8.camel@x41>
Date:	Thu, 08 May 2014 09:12:51 +0200
From:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>
To:	Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] NVMe: silence GCC warning on 32 bit

Matthew,

Paul Bolle schreef op ma 24-03-2014 om 16:36 [+0100]:
> On Mon, 2014-03-24 at 09:31 -0400, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > I should try things myself before opening my big mouth.  Weird.  Using
> > gcc-4.8, I see the same thing.  Guess I should just apply the patch,
> > though it feels wrong to be initialising an entire struct just to silence
> > a bogus compiler warning :-(
> 
> I noticed this difference on a 32 bit x86 machine and a 64 bit x86
> machine that are both running Fedora 20. They both should be at
> gcc-4.8.2 for quite some time now (if I grepped the yum log correctly).
> 
> Anyhow, the warning on 32 bit is rather noisy, so I wanted it gone. But
> my comments should make clear I'm not really happy with this patch. 
> 
> And as this is now unlikely to be in time for v3.14, we might decide to
> dig deeper. It won't be the first time that a rather small change (say,
> converting a variable from signed to unsigned) turns out be enough to
> make GCC understand the flow of the code.

This noisy warning is still seen when compiling v3.15-rc4 for x86 (32
bit, that is). Assuming this patch is not queued anywhere: is the
unsophisticated approach of my v2 acceptable or would you like me to try
and find the cause of this warning?


Paul Bolle

--
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/