From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-lf0-f66.google.com ([209.85.215.66]:34451 "EHLO mail-lf0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751956AbeFGK1S (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jun 2018 06:27:18 -0400 Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 12:27:01 +0200 From: Johan Hovold Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] kernel hacking: new config NO_AUTO_INLINE to disable compiler auto-inline optimizations Message-ID: <20180607102701.GU13775@localhost> References: <20180606142600.GN13775@localhost> <20180606142622.2338abf6@vmware.local.home> <20180607041718.qpqucjzlvcm5h3gn@vireshk-i7> <20180607074628.kd3iyxevwj3ypzbr@intel.com> <20180607083856.ealw62v3wx43zeqz@vireshk-i7> <1303b1abf9f9229a8d3ccbb68a3e413266b360d7.camel@petrovitsch.priv.at> <20180607091025.m7dfix3e2xbwx4cs@vireshk-i7> <20180607091816.GT13775@localhost> <20180607091923.n5q5uzsxuymy3vov@vireshk-i7> <314bb2b3-186e-d7b0-d800-f77a42fd80fa@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <314bb2b3-186e-d7b0-d800-f77a42fd80fa@linaro.org> Sender: linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Alex Elder Cc: Viresh Kumar , Johan Hovold , Bernd Petrovitsch , "Du, Changbin" , Steven Rostedt , gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, alex.elder@linaro.org, kbuild test robot , 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 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