From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E4CBC04AB6 for ; Fri, 31 May 2019 12:30:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2958F268DF for ; Fri, 31 May 2019 12:30:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="bjpUJSfu" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2958F268DF Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42695 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hWggO-0002if-Al for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Fri, 31 May 2019 08:30:52 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:47879) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hWgf7-0002Dj-Gi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 31 May 2019 08:29:34 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hWgUd-0006ju-Hi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 31 May 2019 08:18:44 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-x342.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::342]:34631) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hWgUd-0006jS-DI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 31 May 2019 08:18:43 -0400 Received: by mail-ot1-x342.google.com with SMTP id l17so8973140otq.1 for ; Fri, 31 May 2019 05:18:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:openpgp:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zOudxO+lxcFQ0dAceV2+BYWMrtoFUhxnVm/pIZbiimc=; b=bjpUJSfuBuwpfWKXzC2JTJHGH7yV7i9OPwgq4Km4ZGElRZ7qEnh3j3JQc+lKgn5u5+ c4H4TrWKdrBQ0yxHlb8yeSgJ06WqppjrtNTsNR4LAWrukEhvLzTFP/PiSWgAjEX3biRz 6G16mrn70Qq1TKJm7WebPadL/GkbtwHN8ggh8aM088rP2oNkLusga/ZqIU3lwna34Bgt C+f/bWW7tapXBLsVRpzQBjcuxHFqoFSK8L6vTTDxmuwLSH+xse5B4vZ3ThLsiEsSQFpj JLqgCmTflqlOOUICMwFLoK/nEwuqYt6LXdupbCIAddyqe6VsOoyh9cL1O0e4YjsEJ8wu IOJA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:openpgp:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=zOudxO+lxcFQ0dAceV2+BYWMrtoFUhxnVm/pIZbiimc=; b=cghYGdV51icuKj8T07QQg7cK0Dy7fyhmcbcmEPjQCxBhnxUnLtlfCa+GN+icC/Vf2P dy+7HBYnHr5iyPon1DcmTMAEnsWFJXDe14f4AGUNJUdzORXCPhx9VZVsVCiw5f15ql1I DujLfTflalkob7PKihK0yzLUKjM+DCbw5e/mXbCrncWDpgIM1jjivj0jc9yQZv2Y08oZ mg0ZAp02USzvyTfi3p9tOyLSH7Rm1Ny3gNFcWx/iHj5Z421I2LKvCl93F1s6Xu32smhd rUjDRIuiZ4f3Z9c8M5WU6M40fvvesmy+pw7UUgCxXVyvjEzJpMqfDN1MkEoheHvmK99f mOdA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXJ8eKtfcZOnCQIqgvecJhCg9nXpNPG+t5zMIJmlQXo1IGEzP33 FacmQvIml9+X0dlRz17fvyu+6z0PHaTZQw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxiriXbuzUd+ks85I/BW83ypQmd1hfk82CUzyFxNPHOAyUw0LDtYQ4vpeqTYbVhl248xxe/3g== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:7642:: with SMTP id o2mr313881otl.203.1559305121728; Fri, 31 May 2019 05:18:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.24.12.210] (168.189-204-159.bestelclientes.com.mx. [189.204.159.168]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r205sm2083749oig.0.2019.05.31.05.18.38 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 31 May 2019 05:18:39 -0700 (PDT) To: David Hildenbrand , Peter Maydell , Cornelia Huck References: <20190520170302.13643-1-cohuck@redhat.com> <20190520170302.13643-20-cohuck@redhat.com> <00219505-bdb0-628b-9aed-f3211eb10b61@redhat.com> From: Richard Henderson Openpgp: preference=signencrypt Message-ID: <6efe429b-5c3b-dc62-70fd-362b7c48072c@linaro.org> Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 07:18:36 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <00219505-bdb0-628b-9aed-f3211eb10b61@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4864:20::342 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 19/54] s390x/tcg: Implement VECTOR GALOIS FIELD MULTIPLY SUM (AND ACCUMULATE) X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: qemu-s390x , QEMU Developers Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 5/31/19 6:32 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 30.05.19 13:22, Peter Maydell wrote: >> Hi -- Coverity (CID 1401703) complains that a lot of this >> function is dead code: >> >>> +static S390Vector galois_multiply64(uint64_t a, uint64_t b) >>> +{ >>> + S390Vector res = {}; >>> + S390Vector va = { >>> + .doubleword[1] = a, >>> + }; ... >> but I can't make any sense of its annotations or why it >> thinks this is true. Would somebody like to have a look at the >> issue? If it's just Coverity getting confused we can mark it >> as a false positive. > > I can't make absolutely any sense of the coverity gibberish as well. > > The only think is that "vb->doubleword[0]" will always be 0, but that's > not what coverity is complaining about. > > Marking it as false positive, thanks! It does seem to be gibberish. How in the world does it believe that the dimensionality of S390Vector is variable. However, because of where the two errors are placed, I can only imagine that Coverity is confused by the syntax of the initialization. If it were easier to run and get results, I'd try making the assignment as a separate statement, instead of the init syntax. But it's probably not worth the churn. r~