From: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>, Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>, Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@petrovitsch.priv.at>, "Du, Changbin" <changbin.du@intel.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, alex.elder@linaro.org, kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, michal.lkml@markovi.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, yamada.masahiro@socionext.com, lgirdwood@gmail.com, broonie@kernel.org, rdunlap@infradead.org, x86@kernel.org, linux@armlinux.org.uk, linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, kbuild-all@01.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, changbin.du@gmail.com, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] kernel hacking: new config NO_AUTO_INLINE to disable compiler auto-inline optimizations Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 12:27:01 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20180607102701.GU13775@localhost> (raw) In-Reply-To: <314bb2b3-186e-d7b0-d800-f77a42fd80fa@linaro.org> On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 05:12:51AM -0500, Alex Elder wrote: > On 06/07/2018 04:19 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 07-06-18, 11:18, Johan Hovold wrote: > >> If you want to work around the warning and think you can do it in some > >> non-contrived way, then go for it. > >> > >> Clearing the request buffer, checking for termination using strnlen, and > >> then using memcpy might not be too bad. > >> > >> But after all, it is a false positive, so leaving things as they stand > >> is fine too. > > > > Leave it then :) > > > > It's interesting that the warning isn't reported for this in > fw_mgmt_interface_fw_version_operation(). The difference there is > that you actually put a zero byte at that last position before > returning. I'm mildly impressed if gcc is distinguishing that. Found a redhat blog post claiming it does check for some cases like that: https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2018/05/24/detecting-string-truncation-with-gcc-8/ > You *are* returning the fw_info->firmware_tag array newly filled > with a non-null-terminated string in one of the two cases that > get warnings in "fw-management.c". No, there's no warning for that one (line 250), and there fw_info is used as the source, not the destination, so no unterminated string is returned there either. > But the other one is only > updating a buffer in a local/automatic variable. All three cases, except the one that is explicitly terminated. > Weird. I wish there were a non-clumsy way of marking false positives > like this as A-OK. The gcc docs mentions an attribute for that but it seems a bit overkill here. Thanks, Johan
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org> To: Alex Elder <elder@linaro.org> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>, Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>, Bernd Petrovitsch <bernd@petrovitsch.priv.at>, "Du, Changbin" <changbin.du@intel.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, alex.elder@linaro.org, kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, michal.lkml@markovi.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, yamada.masahiro@socionext.com, lgirdwood@gmail.com, broonie@kernel.org, rdunlap@infradead.org, x86@kernel.org, linux@armlinux.org.uk, linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, kbuild-all@01.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, changbin.du@gmail.com, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] kernel hacking: new config NO_AUTO_INLINE to disable compiler auto-inline optimizations Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 12:27:01 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20180607102701.GU13775@localhost> (raw) Message-ID: <20180607102701.j3KySFrZPBUMCKvhd7d1MDOWzwhwxQRTQJ5-T0OAJRs@z> (raw) In-Reply-To: <314bb2b3-186e-d7b0-d800-f77a42fd80fa@linaro.org> On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 05:12:51AM -0500, Alex Elder wrote: > On 06/07/2018 04:19 AM, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 07-06-18, 11:18, Johan Hovold wrote: > >> If you want to work around the warning and think you can do it in some > >> non-contrived way, then go for it. > >> > >> Clearing the request buffer, checking for termination using strnlen, and > >> then using memcpy might not be too bad. > >> > >> But after all, it is a false positive, so leaving things as they stand > >> is fine too. > > > > Leave it then :) > > > > It's interesting that the warning isn't reported for this in > fw_mgmt_interface_fw_version_operation(). The difference there is > that you actually put a zero byte at that last position before > returning. I'm mildly impressed if gcc is distinguishing that. Found a redhat blog post claiming it does check for some cases like that: https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2018/05/24/detecting-string-truncation-with-gcc-8/ > You *are* returning the fw_info->firmware_tag array newly filled > with a non-null-terminated string in one of the two cases that > get warnings in "fw-management.c". No, there's no warning for that one (line 250), and there fw_info is used as the source, not the destination, so no unterminated string is returned there either. > But the other one is only > updating a buffer in a local/automatic variable. All three cases, except the one that is explicitly terminated. > Weird. I wish there were a non-clumsy way of marking false positives > like this as A-OK. The gcc docs mentions an attribute for that but it seems a bit overkill here. Thanks, Johan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-07 10:27 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2018-06-05 8:13 [RESEND PATCH v5 0/4] kernel hacking: GCC optimization for better debug experience (-Og) changbin.du 2018-06-05 8:13 ` changbin.du 2018-06-05 8:13 ` [PATCH v5 1/4] x86/mm: surround level4_kernel_pgt with #ifdef CONFIG_X86_5LEVEL...#endif changbin.du 2018-06-05 8:13 ` changbin.du 2018-06-05 8:13 ` [PATCH v5 2/4] kernel hacking: new config NO_AUTO_INLINE to disable compiler auto-inline optimizations changbin.du 2018-06-05 8:13 ` changbin.du 2018-06-05 21:21 ` kbuild test robot 2018-06-05 21:21 ` kbuild test robot 2018-06-06 13:57 ` Steven Rostedt 2018-06-06 13:57 ` Steven Rostedt 2018-06-06 14:26 ` Johan Hovold 2018-06-06 14:26 ` Johan Hovold 2018-06-06 18:26 ` Steven Rostedt 2018-06-06 18:26 ` Steven Rostedt 2018-06-07 4:17 ` Viresh Kumar 2018-06-07 4:17 ` Viresh Kumar 2018-06-07 7:46 ` Du, Changbin 2018-06-07 7:46 ` Du, Changbin 2018-06-07 8:38 ` Viresh Kumar 2018-06-07 8:38 ` Viresh Kumar 2018-06-07 9:03 ` Bernd Petrovitsch 2018-06-07 9:03 ` Bernd Petrovitsch 2018-06-07 9:10 ` Viresh Kumar 2018-06-07 9:10 ` Viresh Kumar 2018-06-07 9:18 ` Johan Hovold 2018-06-07 9:18 ` Johan Hovold 2018-06-07 9:19 ` Viresh Kumar 2018-06-07 9:19 ` Viresh Kumar 2018-06-07 10:12 ` Alex Elder 2018-06-07 10:12 ` Alex Elder 2018-06-07 10:27 ` Johan Hovold [this message] 2018-06-07 10:27 ` Johan Hovold 2018-06-08 20:03 ` Steven Rostedt 2018-06-08 20:03 ` Steven Rostedt 2018-06-11 15:46 ` Johan Hovold 2018-06-11 15:46 ` Johan Hovold 2018-06-07 8:06 ` Johan Hovold 2018-06-07 8:06 ` Johan Hovold 2018-06-05 21:34 ` kbuild test robot 2018-06-05 21:34 ` kbuild test robot 2018-06-06 14:01 ` Steven Rostedt 2018-06-06 14:01 ` Steven Rostedt 2018-06-05 8:13 ` [PATCH v5 3/4] ARM: mm: fix build error in fix_to_virt with CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_DEBUGGING changbin.du 2018-06-05 8:13 ` changbin.du 2018-06-05 8:13 ` [PATCH v5 4/4] kernel hacking: new config CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_DEBUGGING to apply GCC -Og optimization changbin.du 2018-06-05 8:13 ` changbin.du 2018-06-10 10:44 ` kbuild test robot 2018-06-10 10:44 ` kbuild test robot 2018-06-10 15:49 ` kbuild test robot 2018-06-10 15:49 ` kbuild test robot 2018-06-11 16:00 ` Steven Rostedt 2018-06-11 16:00 ` Steven Rostedt -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below -- 2018-05-11 8:09 [PATCH v5 0/4] kernel hacking: GCC optimization for better debug experience (-Og) changbin.du 2018-05-11 8:09 ` [PATCH v5 2/4] kernel hacking: new config NO_AUTO_INLINE to disable compiler auto-inline optimizations changbin.du 2018-05-11 8:09 ` changbin.du 2018-05-17 15:49 ` kbuild test robot 2018-05-17 15:49 ` kbuild test robot 2018-05-17 17:58 ` kbuild test robot 2018-05-17 17:58 ` kbuild test robot
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=20180607102701.GU13775@localhost \ --to=johan@kernel.org \ --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=alex.elder@linaro.org \ --cc=arnd@arndb.de \ --cc=bernd@petrovitsch.priv.at \ --cc=broonie@kernel.org \ --cc=changbin.du@gmail.com \ --cc=changbin.du@intel.com \ --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \ --cc=kbuild-all@01.org \ --cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \ --cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-sparse@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \ --cc=lkp@intel.com \ --cc=michal.lkml@markovi.net \ --cc=mingo@redhat.com \ --cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \ --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \ --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \ --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \ --cc=x86@kernel.org \ --cc=yamada.masahiro@socionext.com \ /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: linkBe 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).