From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (pb-smtp1.pobox.com [64.147.108.70]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB9724C62E for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 07:07:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721286478; cv=none; b=AJqQ87VKPgYGl6qDbMa4NKbARdJ3KxDfA2uH6cHyUngOvHB7AKTeuRFFL8DfjUvxwPdlf25g+wx8DNwD9k4vGiYj3zECtloy+yvv+bGVEVLsi8iOhKs10Bz9dna6UKFX8P/TbyMAeV2oxmY26lUwVMLIaSGXnBzd0A72LfV/L+w= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721286478; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OttUanscOmOyzDiHxSSUQXzMIUOYYzoiPst/HBQSnTU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=iMcOkNkvcObdxjLMEiJZMwY3603nYeZRPNDSRpZxAlqHxdZDqGLvvhfNEJdpeqVBwnhn1AMNXfgRIyjcgLJjaocqlXrw5ldDdOPKSXHcIypkW6fhNiliTONsJo8LF1oYLr0mukKEwT94ZFXdmJ+xHSpO+V9Fstmmo7f9bDKn4SM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=ExLoSzDj; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.70 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="ExLoSzDj" Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A6BB2781F; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 03:07:55 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=OttUanscOmOy zDiHxSSUQXzMIUOYYzoiPst/HBQSnTU=; b=ExLoSzDjteqsG68o7Hq1URzdjHSH fLc9hRDajD5aLeF+kf7bfgROCyNqNdATQJNeYa3WlFJfkWgrnkyiNwDPFXboAU4e gXU9Bf0ooWFCBiJvl9wgPT1RamOaOKendM3aU/lFTGWnE6T+A73PVdYdAYTn9sul jvpGp1TAuuIE/VU= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91BE82781E; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 03:07:55 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.139.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F3F882781D; Thu, 18 Jul 2024 03:07:54 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?xJBvw6BuIFRy4bqnbiBDw7RuZw==?= Danh Cc: Ramsay Jones , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] sparse: ignore warning from new glibc headers In-Reply-To: (=?utf-8?B?IsSQb8OgbiBUcuG6p24g?= =?utf-8?B?Q8O0bmc=?= Danh"'s message of "Thu, 18 Jul 2024 09:39:44 +0700") References: <9bdac465-5f43-42de-9cad-e6c43a5a53cc@ramsayjones.plus.com> <8dd1a2c7-5b9f-4e2f-9c5a-d5d5758714e2@ramsayjones.plus.com> <0e2c66ce-d870-4a03-a26e-a928183b9b2b@ramsayjones.plus.com> Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2024 00:07:53 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 7481F258-44D4-11EF-A43C-5B6DE52EC81B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =C4=90o=C3=A0n Tr=E1=BA=A7n C=C3=B4ng Danh writes: >> BTW, I didn't expect it to take this long for this issue to come >> back to the list! I expected it to almost immediately cause >> problems with the sparse ci job, when the version of Ubuntu was >> updated to the LTS (now previous LTS!). So, I just found a simple >> solution for now (which turned into 2 years). > > Well, yeah, -Wno-vla would work, I used that macro __STDC_NO_VLA__ > because I'm not sure Git want to use vla or not, so I only tried to > disable it for system headers. Defining __STDC_NO_VLA__ would rid use of variable length arrays in the regex.h header, so "-Wno-vla" would not be necessary. It's just that it makes me feel a bit dirty to define the macro that only compiler implementations are expected to define in order to cause header files behave the way they would with a compiler without VLA. If we apply Luc's patch [*1*] to sparse, the header would use vla in parameter in the prototype, sparse would grok it, *and* then complain that we are using vla, so we still need "-Wno-vla" on top (but "-Wno-vla" alone would not make (unpatched) sparse grok the construct, of course). > And yes, the vla declarationw as added into glibc 2.35. Thanks. [Reference] *1* https://lore.kernel.org/all/uug4xslokvlxr6z24q52z4pt7nrtiimbzunz2gz3k= pilk4kxts@7jljsksi6baq/