* [PATCH] selftests/nolibc: libc-test: avoid -Wstringop-overflow warnings
@ 2023-09-10 19:29 Thomas Weißschuh
2023-09-11 6:04 ` Willy Tarreau
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Weißschuh @ 2023-09-10 19:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Willy Tarreau, Shuah Khan
Cc: linux-kselftest, linux-kernel, Thomas Weißschuh
Newer versions of glibc annotate the poll() function with
__attribute__(access) which triggers a compiler warning inside the
testcase poll_fault.
Avoid this by using a plain NULL which is enough for the testcase.
To avoid potential future warnings also adapt the other EFAULT
testcases, except select_fault as NULL is a valid value for its
argument.
nolibc-test.c: In function ‘run_syscall’:
nolibc-test.c:338:62: warning: ‘poll’ writing 8 bytes into a region of size 0 overflows the destination [-Wstringop-overflow=]
338 | do { if (!(cond)) result(llen, SKIPPED); else ret += expect_syserr2(expr, expret, experr1, experr2, llen); } while (0)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
nolibc-test.c:341:9: note: in expansion of macro ‘EXPECT_SYSER2’
341 | EXPECT_SYSER2(cond, expr, expret, experr, 0)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
nolibc-test.c:905:47: note: in expansion of macro ‘EXPECT_SYSER’
905 | CASE_TEST(poll_fault); EXPECT_SYSER(1, poll((void *)1, 1, 0), -1, EFAULT); break;
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: note: destination object is likely at address zero
In file included from /usr/include/poll.h:1,
from nolibc-test.c:33:
/usr/include/sys/poll.h:54:12: note: in a call to function ‘poll’ declared with attribute ‘access (write_only, 1, 2)’
54 | extern int poll (struct pollfd *__fds, nfds_t __nfds, int __timeout)
| ^~~~
Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@weissschuh.net>
---
tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c
index e2b70641a1e7..a0478f8eaee8 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c
@@ -895,14 +895,14 @@ int run_syscall(int min, int max)
CASE_TEST(lseek_0); EXPECT_SYSER(1, lseek(0, 0, SEEK_SET), -1, ESPIPE); break;
CASE_TEST(mkdir_root); EXPECT_SYSER(1, mkdir("/", 0755), -1, EEXIST); break;
CASE_TEST(mmap_bad); EXPECT_PTRER(1, mmap(NULL, 0, PROT_READ, MAP_PRIVATE, 0, 0), MAP_FAILED, EINVAL); break;
- CASE_TEST(munmap_bad); EXPECT_SYSER(1, munmap((void *)1, 0), -1, EINVAL); break;
+ CASE_TEST(munmap_bad); EXPECT_SYSER(1, munmap(NULL, 0), -1, EINVAL); break;
CASE_TEST(mmap_munmap_good); EXPECT_SYSZR(1, test_mmap_munmap()); break;
CASE_TEST(open_tty); EXPECT_SYSNE(1, tmp = open("/dev/null", 0), -1); if (tmp != -1) close(tmp); break;
CASE_TEST(open_blah); EXPECT_SYSER(1, tmp = open("/proc/self/blah", 0), -1, ENOENT); if (tmp != -1) close(tmp); break;
CASE_TEST(pipe); EXPECT_SYSZR(1, test_pipe()); break;
CASE_TEST(poll_null); EXPECT_SYSZR(1, poll(NULL, 0, 0)); break;
CASE_TEST(poll_stdout); EXPECT_SYSNE(1, ({ struct pollfd fds = { 1, POLLOUT, 0}; poll(&fds, 1, 0); }), -1); break;
- CASE_TEST(poll_fault); EXPECT_SYSER(1, poll((void *)1, 1, 0), -1, EFAULT); break;
+ CASE_TEST(poll_fault); EXPECT_SYSER(1, poll(NULL, 1, 0), -1, EFAULT); break;
CASE_TEST(prctl); EXPECT_SYSER(1, prctl(PR_SET_NAME, (unsigned long)NULL, 0, 0, 0), -1, EFAULT); break;
CASE_TEST(read_badf); EXPECT_SYSER(1, read(-1, &tmp, 1), -1, EBADF); break;
CASE_TEST(rmdir_blah); EXPECT_SYSER(1, rmdir("/blah"), -1, ENOENT); break;
@@ -911,7 +911,7 @@ int run_syscall(int min, int max)
CASE_TEST(select_stdout); EXPECT_SYSNE(1, ({ fd_set fds; FD_ZERO(&fds); FD_SET(1, &fds); select(2, NULL, &fds, NULL, NULL); }), -1); break;
CASE_TEST(select_fault); EXPECT_SYSER(1, select(1, (void *)1, NULL, NULL, 0), -1, EFAULT); break;
CASE_TEST(stat_blah); EXPECT_SYSER(1, stat("/proc/self/blah", &stat_buf), -1, ENOENT); break;
- CASE_TEST(stat_fault); EXPECT_SYSER(1, stat((void *)1, &stat_buf), -1, EFAULT); break;
+ CASE_TEST(stat_fault); EXPECT_SYSER(1, stat(NULL, &stat_buf), -1, EFAULT); break;
CASE_TEST(stat_timestamps); EXPECT_SYSZR(1, test_stat_timestamps()); break;
CASE_TEST(symlink_root); EXPECT_SYSER(1, symlink("/", "/"), -1, EEXIST); break;
CASE_TEST(unlink_root); EXPECT_SYSER(1, unlink("/"), -1, EISDIR); break;
---
base-commit: f7a6e4791e3d685eddca29b5d16d183ee0407caa
change-id: 20230910-nolibc-poll-fault-4152a6836ef8
Best regards,
--
Thomas Weißschuh <linux@weissschuh.net>
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] selftests/nolibc: libc-test: avoid -Wstringop-overflow warnings
2023-09-10 19:29 [PATCH] selftests/nolibc: libc-test: avoid -Wstringop-overflow warnings Thomas Weißschuh
@ 2023-09-11 6:04 ` Willy Tarreau
2023-09-11 14:26 ` Thomas Weißschuh
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Willy Tarreau @ 2023-09-11 6:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Weißschuh; +Cc: Shuah Khan, linux-kselftest, linux-kernel
Hi Thomas,
On Sun, Sep 10, 2023 at 09:29:01PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> Newer versions of glibc annotate the poll() function with
> __attribute__(access) which triggers a compiler warning inside the
> testcase poll_fault.
> Avoid this by using a plain NULL which is enough for the testcase.
> To avoid potential future warnings also adapt the other EFAULT
> testcases, except select_fault as NULL is a valid value for its
> argument.
(...)
Looks good to me. I wouldn't be surprised if we're soon forced to do
the same with select() on some archs where it might be emulated.
Feel free to push it to the shared repo.
Thanks!
Willy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] selftests/nolibc: libc-test: avoid -Wstringop-overflow warnings
2023-09-11 6:04 ` Willy Tarreau
@ 2023-09-11 14:26 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2023-09-11 14:30 ` Willy Tarreau
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Weißschuh @ 2023-09-11 14:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Willy Tarreau; +Cc: Shuah Khan, linux-kselftest, linux-kernel
Hi Willy!
On 2023-09-11 08:04:49+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 10, 2023 at 09:29:01PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > Newer versions of glibc annotate the poll() function with
> > __attribute__(access) which triggers a compiler warning inside the
> > testcase poll_fault.
> > Avoid this by using a plain NULL which is enough for the testcase.
> > To avoid potential future warnings also adapt the other EFAULT
> > testcases, except select_fault as NULL is a valid value for its
> > argument.
> (...)
>
> Looks good to me. I wouldn't be surprised if we're soon forced to do
> the same with select() on some archs where it might be emulated.
>
> Feel free to push it to the shared repo.
Thanks, I pushed it to the "next" branch.
I'd also like to rebase the next branch onto v6.6-rc1, any objections?
Thomas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] selftests/nolibc: libc-test: avoid -Wstringop-overflow warnings
2023-09-11 14:26 ` Thomas Weißschuh
@ 2023-09-11 14:30 ` Willy Tarreau
2023-09-11 14:47 ` Thomas Weißschuh
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Willy Tarreau @ 2023-09-11 14:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Weißschuh; +Cc: Shuah Khan, linux-kselftest, linux-kernel
On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 04:26:41PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> Hi Willy!
>
> On 2023-09-11 08:04:49+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 10, 2023 at 09:29:01PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > > Newer versions of glibc annotate the poll() function with
> > > __attribute__(access) which triggers a compiler warning inside the
> > > testcase poll_fault.
> > > Avoid this by using a plain NULL which is enough for the testcase.
> > > To avoid potential future warnings also adapt the other EFAULT
> > > testcases, except select_fault as NULL is a valid value for its
> > > argument.
> > (...)
> >
> > Looks good to me. I wouldn't be surprised if we're soon forced to do
> > the same with select() on some archs where it might be emulated.
> >
> > Feel free to push it to the shared repo.
>
> Thanks, I pushed it to the "next" branch.
>
> I'd also like to rebase the next branch onto v6.6-rc1, any objections?
Yes, please go on!
Thanks,
Willy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] selftests/nolibc: libc-test: avoid -Wstringop-overflow warnings
2023-09-11 14:30 ` Willy Tarreau
@ 2023-09-11 14:47 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2023-09-11 15:02 ` Willy Tarreau
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Weißschuh @ 2023-09-11 14:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Willy Tarreau; +Cc: Shuah Khan, linux-kselftest, linux-kernel
On 2023-09-11 16:30:25+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 04:26:41PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > On 2023-09-11 08:04:49+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > > On Sun, Sep 10, 2023 at 09:29:01PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > > > Newer versions of glibc annotate the poll() function with
> > > > __attribute__(access) which triggers a compiler warning inside the
> > > > testcase poll_fault.
> > > > Avoid this by using a plain NULL which is enough for the testcase.
> > > > To avoid potential future warnings also adapt the other EFAULT
> > > > testcases, except select_fault as NULL is a valid value for its
> > > > argument.
> > > (...)
> > >
> > > Looks good to me. I wouldn't be surprised if we're soon forced to do
> > > the same with select() on some archs where it might be emulated.
> > >
> > > Feel free to push it to the shared repo.
> >
> > Thanks, I pushed it to the "next" branch.
> >
> > I'd also like to rebase the next branch onto v6.6-rc1, any objections?
>
> Yes, please go on!
Done.
I used "git rebase --signoff" and dropped the duplicate signoffs it
generated on my own commits.
It's also pushed to git.kernel.org, could you double-check it?
Thanks,
Thomas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] selftests/nolibc: libc-test: avoid -Wstringop-overflow warnings
2023-09-11 14:47 ` Thomas Weißschuh
@ 2023-09-11 15:02 ` Willy Tarreau
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Willy Tarreau @ 2023-09-11 15:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Weißschuh; +Cc: Shuah Khan, linux-kselftest, linux-kernel
On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 04:47:12PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> I used "git rebase --signoff" and dropped the duplicate signoffs it
> generated on my own commits.
>
> It's also pushed to git.kernel.org, could you double-check it?
Looks good to me, thank you!
Willy
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-09-11 22:09 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-09-10 19:29 [PATCH] selftests/nolibc: libc-test: avoid -Wstringop-overflow warnings Thomas Weißschuh
2023-09-11 6:04 ` Willy Tarreau
2023-09-11 14:26 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2023-09-11 14:30 ` Willy Tarreau
2023-09-11 14:47 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2023-09-11 15:02 ` Willy Tarreau
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox