From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@MIT.EDU>
To: Rakib Mullick <rakib.mullick@gmail.com>
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, hpa@zytor.com, tglx@linutronix.de, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, vsyscall: Fix build warning in vsyscall_64.c
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2011 14:03:16 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DF7A264.3030901@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=-xJizWP5H9vNvaJhRN-Vm-ubraA@mail.gmail.com>
On 06/14/2011 01:43 PM, Rakib Mullick wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 12:06 AM, Andrew Lutomirski<luto@mit.edu> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 4:45 AM, Rakib Mullick<rakib.mullick@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Rakib Mullick<rakib.mullick@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 8:52 AM, Andrew Lutomirski<luto@mit.edu> wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 1:12 AM, Rakib Mullick<rakib.mullick@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Andrew Lutomirski<luto@mit.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 3:31 AM, Rakib Mullick<rakib.mullick@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I think there are three separate issues here:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Can ret be used uninitialized? I say no, even as seen by the
>>>>> compiler. If vsyscall_nr is 0, 1, or 2, then ret is initialized. If
>>>>> vsyscall_nr is 3, then the BUG gets hit. BUG is defined as some
>>>>> assembly magic followed by unreachable(), and the compiler is supposed
>>>>> to know that code after unreachable() is qunreachable. So how can ret
>>>>> be used uninitialized?
>>>>>
>>>> I don't have much knowledge of advance assembly, so I really don't
>>>> understand that part - how BUG handles this. If it really makes sure
>>>> that, it will handle it properly then I think you can drop this patch.
>>>>
>>>>> What version of gcc do you have? gcc (GCC) 4.6.0 20110530 (Red Hat
>>>>> 4.6.0-9) does not produce this warning.
>>>>>
>>>> Currently, I'm replying from outside my home. I'll let you know when
>>>> I'm back home.
>>>>
>>> Here is my GCC version - gcc version 4.5.1 20100924 (Red Hat 4.5.1-4)
>>> (GCC). I'm using Fedora 14.
>>
>> I also have gcc (GCC) 4.5.1 20100924 (Red Hat 4.5.1-4) on another box,
>> and I still can't reproduce this.
>>
>> Can you tell me which git revision you're building and send me your
>> .config and the output of:
>>
> I'm using 3.0.0-rc2 (lastly I pulled tip tree 3 days ago). I've
> attached the .config (config.log).
>
>> $ touch arch/x86/kernel/vsyscall_64.o
>> $ make V=1 arch/x86/kernel/vsyscall_64.o
>>
> Output of the above steps are attached (vsyscall_64.log). Hope that will help.
Aha! You have CONFIG_BUG=n. I'm not sure that fixing warnings for that
case is worth it (or is even a good idea).
Can you try this patch, though:
Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@mit.edu>
diff --git a/include/asm-generic/bug.h b/include/asm-generic/bug.h
index dfb0ec6..f4083f4 100644
--- a/include/asm-generic/bug.h
+++ b/include/asm-generic/bug.h
@@ -107,11 +107,11 @@ extern void warn_slowpath_null(const char *file,
const int line);
#else /* !CONFIG_BUG */
#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_BUG
-#define BUG() do {} while(0)
+#define BUG() do { unreachable(); } while(0)
#endif
#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_BUG_ON
-#define BUG_ON(condition) do { if (condition) ; } while(0)
+#define BUG_ON(condition) do { if (condition) unreachable(); } while(0)
#endif
#ifndef HAVE_ARCH_WARN_ON
It may silence a lot of warnings, although it'll come at a cost of
increased code size with CONFIG_BUG=n on older gcc. On newer GCC,
you'll get possibly faster and smaller code.
--Andy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-14 18:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-11 7:31 [PATCH] x86, vsyscall: Fix build warning in vsyscall_64.c Rakib Mullick
2011-06-11 11:01 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-06-12 5:12 ` Rakib Mullick
2011-06-13 2:52 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-06-13 4:54 ` Rakib Mullick
2011-06-13 8:45 ` Rakib Mullick
2011-06-13 18:06 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-06-14 17:43 ` Rakib Mullick
2011-06-14 18:03 ` Andy Lutomirski [this message]
2011-06-14 21:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-06-14 21:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-06-14 21:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-06-14 21:33 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-06-15 5:59 ` Rakib Mullick
2011-06-15 7:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-06-15 18:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-06-15 19:24 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-06-15 19:32 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-06-15 19:51 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-06-13 9:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-06-13 13:03 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-06-13 14:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-06-13 14:18 ` Andrew Lutomirski
2011-06-13 17:05 ` Rakib Mullick
2011-06-13 17:06 ` Andrew Lutomirski
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=4DF7A264.3030901@mit.edu \
--to=luto@mit.edu \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rakib.mullick@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.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