All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>, Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: Linux 6.3-rc3
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 17:48:40 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230320224840.GG25951@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230320220631.GA637514@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>

On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 03:06:31PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> It seems like clang takes into account that the branch has no effect on
> how uninitialized err is, although it does acknowledge there may be
> control flow where err is not used uninitialized because it is not used
> at all by stating "when used here". I guess GCC does not make this
> distinction and places it under -Wmaybe-uninitialized. I could be
> totally wrong though :)

In one place we have the comment

  /* Re-do the plain uninitialized variable check, as optimization may have
     straightened control flow.  Do this first so that we don't accidentally
     get a "may be" warning when we'd have seen an "is" warning later.  */

It seems we miss a similar case here?

In any case, please open a PR if you want this fixed.  Thanks!


Segher

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	llvm@lists.linux.dev,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Subject: Re: Linux 6.3-rc3
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2023 17:48:40 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230320224840.GG25951@gate.crashing.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230320220631.GA637514@dev-arch.thelio-3990X>

On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 03:06:31PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> It seems like clang takes into account that the branch has no effect on
> how uninitialized err is, although it does acknowledge there may be
> control flow where err is not used uninitialized because it is not used
> at all by stating "when used here". I guess GCC does not make this
> distinction and places it under -Wmaybe-uninitialized. I could be
> totally wrong though :)

In one place we have the comment

  /* Re-do the plain uninitialized variable check, as optimization may have
     straightened control flow.  Do this first so that we don't accidentally
     get a "may be" warning when we'd have seen an "is" warning later.  */

It seems we miss a similar case here?

In any case, please open a PR if you want this fixed.  Thanks!


Segher

  reply	other threads:[~2023-03-20 22:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 65+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-03-19 20:50 Linux 6.3-rc3 Linus Torvalds
2023-03-20  8:21 ` Build regressions/improvements in v6.3-rc3 Geert Uytterhoeven
2023-03-21  5:38   ` Build regressions/improvements in v6.3-rc3 (drm/msm/) Randy Dunlap
2023-03-21  5:38     ` Randy Dunlap
2023-03-21  7:34     ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2023-03-21  7:34       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2023-03-21 15:10       ` Randy Dunlap
2023-03-21 15:10         ` Randy Dunlap
2023-03-21 15:33         ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2023-03-21 15:33           ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2023-03-20 18:05 ` Linux 6.3-rc3 Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-20 18:05   ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-20 18:26   ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-20 18:26     ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-20 18:49     ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-20 18:49       ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-20 18:56       ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-20 18:56         ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-20 19:05         ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-20 19:05           ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-20 18:53     ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-20 18:53       ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-20 19:22       ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-20 19:22         ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-22 12:44       ` Kalle Valo
2023-03-22 12:44         ` Kalle Valo
2023-03-22 16:36         ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-22 16:36           ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-22 20:36           ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-22 20:36             ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-24 10:54           ` Kalle Valo
2023-03-24 10:54             ` Kalle Valo
2023-03-24 15:11             ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-24 15:11               ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-24 15:23               ` Kalle Valo
2023-03-24 15:23                 ` Kalle Valo
2023-03-28 19:07                 ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-28 19:07                   ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-29  8:39                   ` Kalle Valo
2023-03-29  8:39                     ` Kalle Valo
2023-03-22 16:40         ` Sedat Dilek
2023-03-22 16:40           ` Sedat Dilek
2023-03-22 16:55           ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-22 16:55             ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-22 18:17             ` Nick Desaulniers
2023-03-22 18:17               ` Nick Desaulniers
2023-03-24 17:16             ` Masahiro Yamada
2023-03-24 17:16               ` Masahiro Yamada
2023-03-27 16:12               ` Jani Nikula
2023-03-27 16:12                 ` Jani Nikula
2023-03-27 17:03                 ` Kalle Valo
2023-03-27 17:03                   ` Kalle Valo
2023-03-20 20:04     ` Guenter Roeck
2023-03-20 20:04       ` Guenter Roeck
2023-03-20 20:30       ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-20 20:30         ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-20 22:06         ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-20 22:06           ` Nathan Chancellor
2023-03-20 22:48           ` Segher Boessenkool [this message]
2023-03-20 22:48             ` Segher Boessenkool
2023-03-20 23:41           ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-20 23:41             ` Linus Torvalds
2023-03-24  9:41   ` Daniel Vetter
2023-03-24  9:41     ` Daniel Vetter
2023-03-20 20:07 ` Guenter Roeck

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20230320224840.GG25951@gate.crashing.org \
    --to=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=airlied@gmail.com \
    --cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
    --cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=nathan@kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.