linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] target: pscsi: avoid Wempty-body 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]

Message-ID: <20210322155344.GA23040@1wt.eu>
Date:   Mon, 22 Mar 2021 16:53:44 +0100
From:   Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanya.kulkarni@....com>,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
        Bodo Stroesser <bstroesser@...fujitsu.com>,
        "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
        Guoqing Jiang <guoqing.jiang@...ud.ionos.com>,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, target-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] target: pscsi: avoid Wempty-body warning

On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 03:47:35PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 12:44:34PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> > 
> > Building with 'make W=1' shows a harmless warning for pscsi:
> > 
> > drivers/target/target_core_pscsi.c: In function 'pscsi_complete_cmd':
> > drivers/target/target_core_pscsi.c:624:33: error: suggest braces around empty body in an 'if' statement [-Werror=empty-body]
> >   624 |                                 ; /* XXX: TCM_LOGICAL_UNIT_COMMUNICATION_FAILURE */
> >       |                                 ^
> > 
> > Rework the coding style as suggested by gcc to avoid the warning.
> 
> I would much, much prefer to drop the bogus warning;
> 
> 	if (foo)
> 		; /* comment */
> 
> is a fairly usual and absolutely sensible style.  The warning on hte
> other hand is completely stupid.

Agreed!

These days it seems there is a competition for the stupidest warning
between compilers, and we've reached the point where working around
them manages to introduce real bugs :-(

I predict we'll soon see warning such as "this comment looks like valid
C code, if you really intended to comment it out, use #if 0 instead". Oh
well, let's hope I have not given a new idea here...

Willy