[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2966d559-2cea-fd95-76d4-df34192a9b88@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 03:10:15 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/tools: Fix gcc-7 warning in relocs.c
On 12/20/16 02:00, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On 2016.12.20 at 01:30 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> I'd strongly prefer a non-data-dependent solution, specifically adding
>> at the top of sort_relocs():
>>
>> if (!r->count)
>> return;
>>
>> However, by my reading of the C and POSIX standards, this is a gcc
>> error: qsort() should do nothing if the count is zero.
>
> No, it is invoking undefined behavior.
H
> Notice the nonnull attribute in /usr/include/stdlib.h:
>
> 739 /* Sort NMEMB elements of BASE, of SIZE bytes each,
> 740 using COMPAR to perform the comparisons. */
> 741 extern void qsort (void *__base, size_t __nmemb, size_t __size,
> 742 __compar_fn_t __compar) __nonnull ((1, 4));
>
> But feel free to revert my patch and add your solution.
Well, s/gcc/glibc/ then.
> The qsort() function shall sort an array of nel objects, the
> initial element of which is pointed to by base. The size of
> each object, in bytes, is specified by the width argument. If
> the nel argument has the value zero, the comparison function
> pointed to by compar shall not be called and no rearrangement
> shall take place.
-hpa
Powered by blists - more mailing lists