From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] table: fix build error with gcc 8
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2018 09:41:32 -0700
Message-ID: <20180409094132.3e439df7@xeon-e3>
References: <20180409124948.130974-1-jasvinder.singh@intel.com>
 <20180409130902.GA129412@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <54CBAA185211B4429112C315DA58FF6D33334FB8@IRSMSX101.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <20180409152812.GA114584@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "Singh, Jasvinder" <jasvinder.singh@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org"
 <dev@dpdk.org>, "Dumitrescu, Cristian" <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>
To: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-pl0-f67.google.com (mail-pl0-f67.google.com
 [209.85.160.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 330BF1B846
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  9 Apr 2018 18:41:35 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-pl0-f67.google.com with SMTP id v5-v6so5493005plo.4
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 09 Apr 2018 09:41:35 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20180409152812.GA114584@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Mon, 9 Apr 2018 16:28:12 +0100
Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 03:51:10PM +0100, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
> >   
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > > Sent: Monday, April 9, 2018 2:09 PM
> > > To: Singh, Jasvinder <jasvinder.singh@intel.com>
> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Dumitrescu, Cristian <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] table: fix build error with gcc 8
> > > 
> > > On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 01:49:48PM +0100, Jasvinder Singh wrote:  
> > > > Fix build error with gcc 8.0 due to cast between function types.
> > > > Fixes: 5a80bf0ae613 ("table: add cuckoo hash")
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jasvinder Singh <jasvinder.singh@intel.com>  
> > > 
> > > What's the actual error message? Why do the types not match?
> > > 
> > > /Bruce  
> >  
> > Error log is captured below;
> > 
> >   CC rte_table_hash_cuckoo.o
> > /librte_table/rte_table_hash_cuckoo.c: In function 'rte_table_hash_cuckoo_create':
> > /librte_table/rte_table_hash_cuckoo.c:110:16: error: cast between incompatible
> >  function types from 'rte_table_hash_op_hash' {aka 'long unsigned int (*)(void *, void *, unsigned int,  long unsigned int)'}
> >  to 'uint32_t (*)(const void *, uint32_t,  uint32_t)' {aka 'unsigned int (*)(const void *, unsigned int,  unsigned int)'} [-Werror=cast-function-type]
> >    .hash_func = (rte_hash_function) p->f_hash,
> >                 ^
> > cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> >   
> Even if the compiler isn't complaining now, how can that cast work? Looking
> at the error message given, it appears there are two big issues:
> 
> 1. The expected function call takes 3 parameters:
> 	(const void *, uint32_t,  uint32_t),
>    but you are giving it a function that takes 4 parameters:
> 	(void *, void *, unsigned int,  long unsigned int)
> 2. The return type expected is "unsigned int", but you are giving a
>    function returning "long unsigned int". On 32-bit systems, these are
>    going to be the same size, but on 64-bit, they will be different.
>    Similarly for the last function argument.
> 
> Is the error message correct?

Yes. the current code is working only by luck