public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] sys_semctl gcc 4.1 warning fix
Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 18:24:05 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060510162404.GR3570@stusta.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0605101116590.5532@gandalf.stny.rr.com>

On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 11:24:31AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 10 May 2006, Daniel Walker wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 2006-05-10 at 16:09 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > On Mer, 2006-05-10 at 07:31 -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > > > Hiding warnings like this can be a hazard as it will hide real warnings
> > > > > later on.
> > > >
> > > > How could it hide real warnings? If anything these patch allow other
> > > > (real warnings) to be seen .
> > >
> > > Because while the warning is present people will check it now and again.
> >
> > But it's pointless to review it, in this case and for this warning .
> >
> > > If you set the variable to zero then you generate extra code and you
> > > ensure nobody will look in future.
> >
> > The extra code is a problem , I'll admit that . But the warning should
> > disappear , it's just a waste .
> >
> 
> What is really needed is an attribute to add to function parameters, that
> tells gcc that the parameter, if a pointer, will be initialize via the
> function.
> 
> For example:
> 
> #define __assigned  __attribute__((initialized))
> 
> then declare a function:
> 
> int my_init_variabl(__assigned struct mystruct *var);
> 
> So gcc can know that the passed in variable will be updated. It could
> then check to see if the function actually does initialize the pointer,
> if the declaration is visible to the function definition itself.
> 
> Any gcc developers watching :)


It seems you don't understand the problem at all:


First of all note that your example does not apply in this case:

copy_semid_from_user() does _not_ initialize sembuf in all cases.


And you do not understand where gcc's problem is:

gcc does in fact see that setbuf is always initialized if 
copy_semid_from_user() returns 0.

setbuf is only initialized in the (cmd == IPC_SET) case and later only 
used in the (cmd == IPC_SET) case. And cmd can't change between the two 
occurences.

Therefore, gcc should in theory already have enough information to prove 
that sembuf is always initialized before it's used.


> -- Steve


cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed


  reply	other threads:[~2006-05-10 16:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-05-10  2:56 [PATCH -mm] sys_semctl gcc 4.1 warning fix Daniel Walker
2006-05-10 10:34 ` Alan Cox
2006-05-10 14:31   ` Daniel Walker
2006-05-10 15:09     ` Alan Cox
2006-05-10 15:06       ` Daniel Walker
2006-05-10 15:24         ` Steven Rostedt
2006-05-10 16:24           ` Adrian Bunk [this message]
2006-05-10 17:18             ` Steven Rostedt
2006-05-10 17:45               ` Steven Rostedt
2006-05-10 18:27                 ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-05-10 19:07                   ` Serge Belyshev
2006-05-10 20:24                 ` Adrian Bunk
2006-05-10 20:35                   ` Steven Rostedt
2006-05-10 20:36                   ` Adrian Bunk
2006-05-10 20:53                     ` Steven Rostedt
2006-05-10 19:20             ` Steven Rostedt
2006-05-10 19:49               ` Daniel Walker
2006-05-10 20:44                 ` Steven Rostedt
2006-05-10 21:11                   ` Daniel Walker
2006-05-10 21:20                     ` Al Viro
2006-05-10 21:33                       ` Daniel Walker
2006-05-10 21:39                         ` Al Viro
2006-05-10 21:45                           ` Daniel Walker
2006-05-10 21:48                             ` Al Viro
2006-05-11  6:36                       ` Steven Rostedt
2006-05-10 15:39         ` Alan Cox
2006-05-10 15:38           ` Daniel Walker
2006-05-10 16:21             ` Al Viro
2006-05-10 16:37               ` Daniel Walker
2006-05-10 16:42                 ` Al Viro
2006-05-10 17:25                   ` Daniel Walker
2006-05-10 19:55                 ` Alistair John Strachan
2006-05-10 22:03               ` Andrew Morton
2006-05-10 22:10                 ` Al Viro
2006-05-10 22:31                   ` David S. Miller
2006-05-10 22:45                     ` Al Viro
2006-05-10 23:05                       ` Andrew Morton
2006-05-10 23:20                         ` Al Viro
2006-05-10 23:45                           ` Andrew Morton
2006-05-11  1:28                             ` Al Viro
2006-05-11  8:11                               ` Steven Rostedt
2006-05-11 10:07                                 ` [PATCH -mm] introduce a false positive macro Steven Rostedt
2006-05-11 20:40                             ` [PATCH -mm] sys_semctl gcc 4.1 warning fix Adrian Bunk
2006-05-11 21:14                               ` Al Viro
2006-05-10 23:06                     ` Roland Dreier
2006-05-10 22:30                 ` David S. Miller
2006-05-11  2:58                   ` Mike Galbraith

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=20060510162404.GR3570@stusta.de \
    --to=bunk@stusta.de \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=dwalker@mvista.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    /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