From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jinhui huang Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2018 09:41:33 +0800 Subject: [LTP] [PATCH 2/3] syscalls/pipe*: Fix compiler warnings In-Reply-To: <20180305080334.amcwf4ghvb7cxv7c@dell5510> References: <1519977744-1595-1-git-send-email-huangjh.jy@cn.fujitsu.com> <1519977744-1595-2-git-send-email-huangjh.jy@cn.fujitsu.com> <20180305080334.amcwf4ghvb7cxv7c@dell5510> Message-ID: <5A9DF1CD.40706@cn.fujitsu.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it 于 2018/03/05 16:03, Petr Vorel 写道: > Hi Jinhui, > >> Signed-off-by: Jinhui Huang >> --- >> testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe04.c | 2 +- >> testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe05.c | 4 ++-- >> testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe07.c | 2 +- >> testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe08.c | 2 ++ >> testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe11.c | 6 +++--- >> 5 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe04.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe04.c >> index b3d255b..a3c56e3 100644 >> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe04.c >> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe04.c >> @@ -235,7 +235,7 @@ void c2func(void) >> tst_resm(TBROK | TERRNO, "[child 2] pipe write failed"); >> } >> -void alarmfunc(int sig) >> +void alarmfunc(int sig LTP_ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED) >> { >> /* for some reason tst_brkm doesn't seem to work in a signal handler */ >> tst_brkm(TFAIL, cleanup, "one or more children did't die in 60 second " >> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe05.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe05.c >> index fe5ec37..4105988 100644 >> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe05.c >> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe05.c >> @@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ void sig11_handler(int sig); >> int main(int ac, char **av) >> { >> - int lc; >> + volatile int lc; > Why volatile? > Hi Petr, The compiler warning: pipe05.c: In function ‘main’: pipe05.c:62:6: warning: variable ‘lc’ might be clobbered by ‘longjmp’ or ‘vfork’ [-Wclobbered] int lc; We may avoid this warning by declaring "lc" as volatile which tells the optimizer not to optimize it. >> struct sigaction sa, osa; >> tst_parse_opts(ac, av, NULL, NULL); >> @@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ void setup(void) >> /****************************************************************** >> * sig11_handler() - our segfault recover hack >> ******************************************************************/ >> -void sig11_handler(int sig) >> +void sig11_handler(int sig LTP_ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED) >> { >> longjmp(sig11_recover, 1); >> } >> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe07.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe07.c >> index b09df71..55bb9f4 100644 >> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe07.c >> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe07.c >> @@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ static void record_open_fds(void) >> if (fd == dir_fd) >> continue; >> - if (rec_fds_max>= ARRAY_SIZE(rec_fds)) { >> + if (rec_fds_max>= (int)ARRAY_SIZE(rec_fds)) { >> tst_brkm(TBROK, cleanup, >> "Too much file descriptors open"); >> } >> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe08.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe08.c >> index cdb2a4d..9f8d9cc 100644 >> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe08.c >> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe08.c >> @@ -98,6 +98,8 @@ int main(int ac, char **av) >> * sent >> */ >> written = write(pipefd[1], wrbuf, length); >> + if (written> 0) >> + tst_brkm(TBROK, cleanup, "write succeeded expectedly"); > Did you mean "unexpectedly"? > Yes. Best regards, Jinhui >> } >> cleanup(); >> tst_exit(); >> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe11.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe11.c >> index e11c556..e3b2741 100644 >> --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe11.c >> +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/pipe/pipe11.c >> @@ -198,7 +198,8 @@ void do_child_uclinux(void) >> */ >> void setup(void) >> { >> - int i, j; >> + int i; >> + unsigned int j; >> tst_sig(FORK, DEF_HANDLER, cleanup); >> @@ -230,9 +231,8 @@ void setup(void) >> j = 0; >> for (i = 0; i< szcharbuf;) { >> wrbuf[i++] = rawchars[j++]; >> - if (j>= sizeof(rawchars)) { >> + if (j>= sizeof(rawchars)) >> j = 0; >> - } >> } >> } > Otherwise LGTM, thanks! > > > Kind regards, > Petr > > > . >