From: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To: Sebastian Ott <sebott@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Zenghui Yu <yuzenghui@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] KVM: arm64: fix override-init warnings in W=1 builds
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 15:40:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <875xt667n9.wl-maz@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3b882ac0-fd2c-35df-38d7-b89cf073bcc3@redhat.com>
On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 11:28:06 +0100,
Sebastian Ott <sebott@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 12 Jul 2024, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 12:03:30 +0100,
> > Sebastian Ott <sebott@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> -static const exit_handler_fn hyp_exit_handlers[] = {
> >> - [0 ... ESR_ELx_EC_MAX] = NULL,
> >> +static const exit_handler_fn hyp_exit_handlers[ESR_ELx_EC_MAX + 1] = {
> >
> > Is this really any better? I don't think so. It makes the intent
> > disappear instead of making it explicit. Intent matters *a lot*.
>
> I'm not claiming that it's an improvement to the code.
<rant>
Silencing pointless warnings should never have priority over keeping
the code maintainable and understandable. I hope we can agree we are
not in the business of making the kernel *worse* than it already is on
that front, right?
</rant>
I like good tooling as much as the next kernel tinkerer. But W=1 is,
in its current form, quite the opposite. Mark posted a link to a 5
year old thread, showing a number of ways compilers could use extra
annotation to lift the multiple initialisation ambiguity. This
approach has seen no traction, which is a bit sad.
> But yea, I see your point. How about disabling that flag in the
> makefile?
Yes, that'd be a reasonable workaround until someone fixes the
toolchains. I see that Loongarch is already doing it for the exact
same purpose.
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-15 14:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-12 11:03 [PATCH 0/3] KVM: arm64: fix warnings in W=1 build Sebastian Ott
2024-07-12 11:03 ` [PATCH 1/3] KVM: arm64: fix override-init warnings in W=1 builds Sebastian Ott
2024-07-12 21:55 ` Marc Zyngier
2024-07-15 9:35 ` Mark Rutland
2024-07-15 10:43 ` Sebastian Ott
2024-07-15 10:28 ` Sebastian Ott
2024-07-15 14:40 ` Marc Zyngier [this message]
2024-07-12 11:03 ` [PATCH 2/3] KVM: arm64: fix kdoc " Sebastian Ott
2024-07-12 11:03 ` [PATCH 3/3] KVM: arm64: vgic: fix unexpected unlock sparse warnings Sebastian Ott
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=875xt667n9.wl-maz@kernel.org \
--to=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=sebott@redhat.com \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yuzenghui@huawei.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: 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).