[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <154513398652.1108.7150969916024071452@skylake-alporthouse-com>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 11:53:06 +0000
From: Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk>
To: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Cc: jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com, joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com,
rodrigo.vivi@...el.com, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/i915: Disable -Wuninitialized for intel_breadcrumbs.o
Quoting Nick Desaulniers (2018-10-25 23:20:58)
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 12:36 PM Nathan Chancellor
> <natechancellor@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > This warning is disabled by default in scripts/Makefile.extrawarn when
> > W= is not provided but this Makefile adds -Wall after this warning is
> > disabled so it shows up in the build when it shouldn't:
> >
> > In file included from drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_breadcrumbs.c:895:
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/selftests/intel_breadcrumbs.c:350:34: error:
> > variable 'wq' is uninitialized when used within its own initialization
> > [-Werror,-Wuninitialized]
> > DECLARE_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD_ONSTACK(wq);
> > ^~
> > ./include/linux/wait.h:74:63: note: expanded from macro
> > 'DECLARE_WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD_ONSTACK'
> > struct wait_queue_head name = __WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD_INIT_ONSTACK(name)
> > ~~~~ ^~~~
> > ./include/linux/wait.h:72:33: note: expanded from macro
> > '__WAIT_QUEUE_HEAD_INIT_ONSTACK'
> > ({ init_waitqueue_head(&name); name; })
> > ^~~~
> > 1 error generated.
> >
> > This warning looks to be a false positive given that init_waitqueue_head
> > initializes name before it is used. Rather than disable the warning for
> > the full folder like commit 46e2068081e9 ("drm/i915: Disable some extra
>
> cc author/reviewer of 46e2068081e9.
>
> I'm fine with the patch as is, unless others prefer to disable it for
> the whole subdir? We could be playing whack-a-mole in the future
> disabling this warning for other translation units.
Yes, exactly this since the warning is generated by a core header and a
fairly common pattern its use is not restricted to any single file.
(Will not all selftests similarly explode?)
The other false-positive clang-6 gave was for local_clock_us().
Presumably that one is fixed?
-Chris
Powered by blists - more mailing lists