* Re: [PATCH 1/2] qnx4: Extract dir entry filename processing into helper
[not found] <20231118033225.2181299-1-keescook@chromium.org>
@ 2023-11-18 18:00 ` kernel test robot
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: kernel test robot @ 2023-11-18 18:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kees Cook, Anders Larsen
Cc: llvm, oe-kbuild-all, Kees Cook, Ronald Monthero, linux-kernel,
linux-hardening
Hi Kees,
kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
[auto build test WARNING on linus/master]
[also build test WARNING on v6.7-rc1 next-20231117]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Kees-Cook/qnx4-Extract-dir-entry-filename-processing-into-helper/20231118-114223
base: linus/master
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231118033225.2181299-1-keescook%40chromium.org
patch subject: [PATCH 1/2] qnx4: Extract dir entry filename processing into helper
config: hexagon-allmodconfig (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231119/202311190108.LDeSe9Lj-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: clang version 17.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project.git 4a5ac14ee968ff0ad5d2cc1ffa0299048db4c88a)
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20231119/202311190108.LDeSe9Lj-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202311190108.LDeSe9Lj-lkp@intel.com/
All warnings (new ones prefixed by >>):
In file included from fs/qnx4/inode.c:20:
In file included from include/linux/pagemap.h:11:
In file included from include/linux/highmem.h:12:
In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11:
In file included from ./arch/hexagon/include/generated/asm/hardirq.h:1:
In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17:
In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20:
In file included from include/linux/io.h:13:
In file included from arch/hexagon/include/asm/io.h:337:
include/asm-generic/io.h:547:31: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
547 | val = __raw_readb(PCI_IOBASE + addr);
| ~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/asm-generic/io.h:560:61: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
560 | val = __le16_to_cpu((__le16 __force)__raw_readw(PCI_IOBASE + addr));
| ~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/uapi/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:37:51: note: expanded from macro '__le16_to_cpu'
37 | #define __le16_to_cpu(x) ((__force __u16)(__le16)(x))
| ^
In file included from fs/qnx4/inode.c:20:
In file included from include/linux/pagemap.h:11:
In file included from include/linux/highmem.h:12:
In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11:
In file included from ./arch/hexagon/include/generated/asm/hardirq.h:1:
In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17:
In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20:
In file included from include/linux/io.h:13:
In file included from arch/hexagon/include/asm/io.h:337:
include/asm-generic/io.h:573:61: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
573 | val = __le32_to_cpu((__le32 __force)__raw_readl(PCI_IOBASE + addr));
| ~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/uapi/linux/byteorder/little_endian.h:35:51: note: expanded from macro '__le32_to_cpu'
35 | #define __le32_to_cpu(x) ((__force __u32)(__le32)(x))
| ^
In file included from fs/qnx4/inode.c:20:
In file included from include/linux/pagemap.h:11:
In file included from include/linux/highmem.h:12:
In file included from include/linux/hardirq.h:11:
In file included from ./arch/hexagon/include/generated/asm/hardirq.h:1:
In file included from include/asm-generic/hardirq.h:17:
In file included from include/linux/irq.h:20:
In file included from include/linux/io.h:13:
In file included from arch/hexagon/include/asm/io.h:337:
include/asm-generic/io.h:584:33: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
584 | __raw_writeb(value, PCI_IOBASE + addr);
| ~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/asm-generic/io.h:594:59: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
594 | __raw_writew((u16 __force)cpu_to_le16(value), PCI_IOBASE + addr);
| ~~~~~~~~~~ ^
include/asm-generic/io.h:604:59: warning: performing pointer arithmetic on a null pointer has undefined behavior [-Wnull-pointer-arithmetic]
604 | __raw_writel((u32 __force)cpu_to_le32(value), PCI_IOBASE + addr);
| ~~~~~~~~~~ ^
In file included from fs/qnx4/inode.c:24:
>> fs/qnx4/qnx4.h:86:51: warning: '_Static_assert' with no message is a C2x extension [-Wc2x-extensions]
86 | offsetof(struct qnx4_link_info, dl_status));
| ^
| , ""
fs/qnx4/qnx4.h:88:56: warning: '_Static_assert' with no message is a C2x extension [-Wc2x-extensions]
88 | offsetof(union qnx4_directory_entry, de_status));
| ^
| , ""
8 warnings generated.
vim +/_Static_assert +86 fs/qnx4/qnx4.h
47
48 /*
49 * A qnx4 directory entry is an inode entry or link info
50 * depending on the status field in the last byte. The
51 * first byte is where the name start either way, and a
52 * zero means it's empty.
53 *
54 * Also, due to a bug in gcc, we don't want to use the
55 * real (differently sized) name arrays in the inode and
56 * link entries, but always the 'de_name[]' one in the
57 * fake struct entry.
58 *
59 * See
60 *
61 * https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99578#c6
62 *
63 * for details, but basically gcc will take the size of the
64 * 'name' array from one of the used union entries randomly.
65 *
66 * This use of 'de_name[]' (48 bytes) avoids the false positive
67 * warnings that would happen if gcc decides to use 'inode.di_name'
68 * (16 bytes) even when the pointer and size were to come from
69 * 'link.dl_name' (48 bytes).
70 *
71 * In all cases the actual name pointer itself is the same, it's
72 * only the gcc internal 'what is the size of this field' logic
73 * that can get confused.
74 */
75 union qnx4_directory_entry {
76 struct {
77 const char de_name[48];
78 u8 de_pad[15];
79 u8 de_status;
80 };
81 struct qnx4_inode_entry inode;
82 struct qnx4_link_info link;
83 };
84 /* Make sure the status byte is in the same place for all structs. */
85 _Static_assert(offsetof(struct qnx4_inode_entry, di_status) ==
> 86 offsetof(struct qnx4_link_info, dl_status));
87 _Static_assert(offsetof(struct qnx4_inode_entry, di_status) ==
88 offsetof(union qnx4_directory_entry, de_status));
89
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread