From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B04DC433EF for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 19:25:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232023AbiCGT01 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Mar 2022 14:26:27 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37340 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232064AbiCGT00 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Mar 2022 14:26:26 -0500 Received: from mail-lj1-x232.google.com (mail-lj1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::232]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 418CE4DF55 for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 11:25:30 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lj1-x232.google.com with SMTP id bn33so21985742ljb.6 for ; Mon, 07 Mar 2022 11:25:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Zde+bArhl6iHnfeDcrHDIvktUnraUGyUCuxigU/BOkY=; b=KhRk/1V7uwjfSpHh19Rrs/JpqMPgVDx+fFU9lWjxPiYuzbX/u4MIPZigCcKkR1w/Fi OkkTbXKKY+Wx/7SApjnQ59ozRVWfXnYGQXwuJN4mx22VG83lFlUNPxQXTZkMY3PbMjk6 uSqe2Jm0pS2Qd6/sCTdLQLOxKcBqeGyA11xvCbmB7EmfWUXR3TbIzBcWxB2baiQJ3nye MjQGpqxjvGM8ThoYzduO3f/qsZ1DmcDQi5tbsvtYsPZsXiIt3Gq2yCnYzPFgySyIghbR MPIFy4hOZ/qulEQcCjpRD//grvSJDtA8JmwssrL5h1qYrwK61j4vYSTWXT4009RI9grG 9laA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Zde+bArhl6iHnfeDcrHDIvktUnraUGyUCuxigU/BOkY=; b=63YX5yt6q0G3Xde9sbuPN1HQwv6+ddLUzH9tgpjgiwMPPvb2pM4TD+JgIN5558cvIX 2ZbMdGsPUkKiX232DgY6pRru8dPBcy6+sDLl7MVJttyddwoHl8OS/e7NSUsD/vRycLz2 HlHoA+5ssmjxptOLp5rFTIVLlyC9rXCb5hPYmL8/HC81VAg9JZJ1prLoT15rZe1cwlH1 L4TlLmrUk5ZL6OfRA32JmuHWsHsC8fCOUem0Bq/p85TdMc3PsM6wso7er1V6cRzcoOI2 o5Sb3aenCtNk8knv0mfvGBXEY+QlU70yCJ4cs9+at2l1+6WdjsLUP2Urtcuvl67GcXBW Of8Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531ig7gkyoOuI+z2PpPTwU2sUmmJC4Xy/Q/ytcKEsOTfTODRk2ex oNJYQL3SpdReBzNz6FcNdGXWH9g9qfX3t3TOfpJfMga7X3FgWf2O X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwNfCjyiif9DMrdPtATO6xJkrKid3s/RoxeqvVrxuHQFLXwY58EUFhAM8dhqrn7AT08/Q6wAXy+HzCq3lENTVI= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:bf24:0:b0:246:801e:39d3 with SMTP id c36-20020a2ebf24000000b00246801e39d3mr8338955ljr.472.1646681127052; Mon, 07 Mar 2022 11:25:27 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220304224645.3677453-1-memxor@gmail.com> <20220304224645.3677453-6-memxor@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20220304224645.3677453-6-memxor@gmail.com> From: Nick Desaulniers Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2022 11:25:15 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 5/8] compiler-clang.h: Add __diag infrastructure for clang To: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi , Arnd Bergmann Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , Martin KaFai Lau , Nathan Chancellor , llvm@lists.linux.dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 2:47 PM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote: > > From: Nathan Chancellor > > Add __diag macros similar to those in compiler-gcc.h, so that warnings > that need to be adjusted for specific cases but not globally can be > ignored when building with clang. > > Cc: Nathan Chancellor > Cc: Nick Desaulniers > Cc: llvm@lists.linux.dev > Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor > [ Kartikeya: wrote commit message ] > Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi > --- > include/linux/compiler-clang.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/include/linux/compiler-clang.h b/include/linux/compiler-clang.h > index 3c4de9b6c6e3..f1aa41d520bd 100644 > --- a/include/linux/compiler-clang.h > +++ b/include/linux/compiler-clang.h The equivalent functionality for GCC has 357 #ifndef __diag_GCC 358 #define __diag_GCC(version, severity, string) 359 #endif in include/linux/compiler_types.h. Should this patch as well? (at least #define __diag_clang`)? > @@ -68,3 +68,25 @@ > > #define __nocfi __attribute__((__no_sanitize__("cfi"))) > #define __cficanonical __attribute__((__cfi_canonical_jump_table__)) > + > +/* > + * Turn individual warnings and errors on and off locally, depending > + * on version. > + */ > +#define __diag_clang(version, severity, s) \ > + __diag_clang_ ## version(__diag_clang_ ## severity s) > + > +/* Severity used in pragma directives */ > +#define __diag_clang_ignore ignored > +#define __diag_clang_warn warning > +#define __diag_clang_error error These severities match GCC. I wonder if rather than copy+pasting these over, we could rework __diag_ignore, __diag_warn, and __diag_error to not invoke a compiler-suffixed macro and rather pass the compiler along (or make it implicit since we know CONFIG_CC_IS_CLANG vs CONFIG_CC_IS_GCC)? We can probably land this than follow up on better code-reuse between compilers for diagnostics. > + > +#define __diag_str1(s) #s > +#define __diag_str(s) __diag_str1(s) > +#define __diag(s) _Pragma(__diag_str(clang diagnostic s)) > + > +#if CONFIG_CLANG_VERSION >= 110000 > +#define __diag_clang_11(s) __diag(s) > +#else > +#define __diag_clang_11(s) > +#endif > -- > 2.35.1 > -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers