git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] ci: compile "linux-gcc-default" job with -Og
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 06:15:22 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240613101522.GC817573@coredump.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqo785olpp.fsf@gitster.g>

On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 03:11:30PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> By the way, I do not know if any compiler gives us such a feature,
> but if the trick to squelch a false positive were finer grained, I
> would have been much more receptive to the idea of building with
> different optimization level, allowing a bit more false positives.
> 
> The workaround everybody jumps at is to initialize the variable to a
> meaningless value (like 0) and I have explained why it is suboptimal
> already.  But if we can tell less intelligent compilers "we know our
> use of this variable AT THIS POINT is safe", e.g. by annotating the
> above snippet of the code, perhaps like this:
> 
>                 if (ret) {
>                         if (data)
> 				/* -Wno-uninitialized (mtimes_size) */
>                                 munmap(data, mtimes_size);
> 			printf("debug %d\n", (int)mtimes_size);
> 
> then it would be clear to the compiler that understand the
> annotation that inside that "if (data)" block, we know that
> the use of mtimes_size is not using an uninitialized variable.
> 
> For the use of the same variable on the next "debug" line, because
> it is outside of that "if (data)" block, the annotation should have
> no effect, and the compiler is free to do its own analysis and we
> will accept if it finds mtimes_size can be used uninitialized there.
> Any new use added for the same variable will not be masked by a
> meaningless initialization if we can use such a "workaround" to
> squelch false positives.

I agree that such an annotation is much more focused. It's still not
foolproof, though (e.g., we might chance earlier code so that the
data/mtimes_size correlation is no longer true).

I think you could do it with:

			if (data)
#pragma GCC diagnostic push
#pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wuninitialized"
				munmap(data, mtimes_size);
#pragma GCC diagnostic pop

which is...ugly. There's a _Pragma() operator, too, which I think would
let you make a macro like:

			if (data)
				SUPPRESS("-Wuninitialized", munmap(data, mtimes_size));

which is maybe slightly less horrific? Still pretty magical though.

But if the alternative is to do none of that, and just continue to avoid
looking for warnings with -Os, I prefer that.

-Peff

  reply	other threads:[~2024-06-13 10:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-06-06  6:30 [PATCH 0/2] ci: detect more warnings via `-Og` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-06  6:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] ci: fix check for Ubuntu 20.04 Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-06  6:53   ` Jeff King
2024-06-06  7:44     ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-06  6:30 ` [PATCH 2/2] ci: let pedantic job compile with -Og Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-06  6:52   ` Jeff King
2024-06-06  7:41     ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-06  8:05       ` Jeff King
2024-06-06  8:25         ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-06  9:31         ` [PATCH v2 0/2] ci: detect more warnings via `-Og` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-06  9:31           ` [PATCH v2 1/2] ci: fix check for Ubuntu 20.04 Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-06  9:31           ` [PATCH v2 2/2] ci: compile "linux-gcc-default" job with -Og Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-06 15:32             ` Justin Tobler
2024-06-06 17:02             ` Junio C Hamano
2024-06-07  5:28               ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-07 18:45                 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-06-08  8:49                   ` Jeff King
2024-06-07 18:48             ` Junio C Hamano
2024-06-07 20:35               ` Junio C Hamano
2024-06-07  6:46         ` [PATCH v3 0/4] ci: detect more warnings via `-Og` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-07  6:46           ` [PATCH v3 1/4] ci: fix check for Ubuntu 20.04 Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-07  6:46           ` [PATCH v3 2/4] Makefile: add ability to append to CFLAGS and LDFLAGS Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-08  8:55             ` Jeff King
2024-06-08 19:01               ` Junio C Hamano
2024-06-10  7:01                 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-07  6:46           ` [PATCH v3 3/4] ci: compile code with V=1 Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-07  6:46           ` [PATCH v3 4/4] ci: compile "linux-gcc-default" job with -Og Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-07 20:47           ` [PATCH v3 0/4] ci: detect more warnings via `-Og` Junio C Hamano
2024-06-08  9:28             ` Jeff King
2024-06-08 23:12               ` Junio C Hamano
2024-06-10  6:25                 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-06 16:32     ` [PATCH 2/2] ci: let pedantic job compile with -Og Junio C Hamano
2024-06-07  5:10       ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-07 18:42         ` Junio C Hamano
2024-06-10  6:38 ` [PATCH v4 0/2] ci: detect more warnings via `-Og` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-10  6:38   ` [PATCH v4 1/2] Makefile: add ability to append to CFLAGS and LDFLAGS Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-10  6:38   ` [PATCH v4 2/2] ci: compile "linux-gcc-default" job with -Og Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-10 16:06     ` Junio C Hamano
2024-06-10 18:36       ` [PATCH 1/2] DONTAPPLY: -Og fallout workaround Junio C Hamano
2024-06-10 20:05         ` Junio C Hamano
2024-06-11 12:09           ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-11 17:30             ` Junio C Hamano
2024-06-12  4:42               ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-12  4:45                 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-10 18:36       ` [PATCH 2/2] DONTAPPLY: -Os " Junio C Hamano
2024-06-12 22:11       ` [PATCH v4 2/2] ci: compile "linux-gcc-default" job with -Og Junio C Hamano
2024-06-13 10:15         ` Jeff King [this message]
2024-06-13 15:47           ` Junio C Hamano

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=20240613101522.GC817573@coredump.intra.peff.net \
    --to=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=ps@pks.im \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).