When neither CONFIG_ALTIVEC, nor CONFIG_VSX or CONFIG_PPC64 is defined, the
array feature_properties is defined as an empty array, which in turn
triggers the following warning (treated as error on W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c: In function ‘check_cpu_feature_properties’:
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c:298:16: error: comparison of unsigned expression < 0 is always false [-Werror=type-limits]
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++i, ++fp) {
^
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
The inline keyword was not at the beginning of the function declaration.
Fix the following warning (treated as error in W=1)
CC kernel/sys.o
arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c:283:1: error: ‘inline’ is not at beginning of declaration [-Werror=old-style-declaration]
static int nokprobe_inline copy_mem_in(u8 *dest, unsigned long ea, int nb,
^~~~~~
arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c:388:1: error: ‘inline’ is not at beginning of declaration [-Werror=old-style-declaration]
static int nokprobe_inline copy_mem_out(u8 *dest, unsigned long ea, int nb,
^~~~~~
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.o
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
@@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ static nokprobe_inline int read_mem_aligned(unsigned long *dest,*Copyfromuserspacetoabuffer,usingthelargestpossible*alignedaccesses,uptosizeof(long).*/-staticintnokprobe_inlinecopy_mem_in(u8*dest,unsignedlongea,intnb,+staticnokprobe_inlineintcopy_mem_in(u8*dest,unsignedlongea,intnb,structpt_regs*regs){interr=0;
@@ -385,7 +385,7 @@ static nokprobe_inline int write_mem_aligned(unsigned long val,*Copyfromabuffertouserspace,usingthelargestpossible*alignedaccesses,uptosizeof(long).*/-staticintnokprobe_inlinecopy_mem_out(u8*dest,unsignedlongea,intnb,+staticnokprobe_inlineintcopy_mem_out(u8*dest,unsignedlongea,intnb,structpt_regs*regs){interr=0;
Re-use the object-like macro EARLYCON_USED_OR_UNUSED to mark
`earlycon_acpi_spcr_enable` as maybe_unused.
Fix the following warning (treated as error in W=1)
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.o
In file included from ./include/linux/serial_8250.h:14:0,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c:33:
./include/linux/serial_core.h:382:19: error: ‘earlycon_acpi_spcr_enable’ defined but not used [-Werror=unused-const-variable=]
static const bool earlycon_acpi_spcr_enable;
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
include/linux/serial_core.h | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
Rewrite comparison since all values compared are of type `unsigned long`.
Fix a warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.o
In file included from ./include/linux/bug.h:5:0,
from ./include/linux/cpumask.h:13,
from ./include/linux/smp.h:13,
from ./include/linux/kernel_stat.h:5,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:35:
./include/linux/dma-mapping.h: In function ‘dma_map_resource’:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h:129:32: error: comparison of unsigned expression >= 0 is always true [-Werror=type-limits]
#define pfn_valid(pfn) ((pfn) >= ARCH_PFN_OFFSET && (pfn) < max_mapnr)
^
Suggested-by: Segher Boessenkool <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
In commit 5aae8a537080 ("powerpc, hw_breakpoints: Implement hw_breakpoints
for 64-bit server processors") function hw_breakpoint_handler and
arch_unregister_hw_breakpoint were added without function prototypes in
hw_breakpoint.h header.
Fix the following warning(s) (treated as error in W=1):
AR init/built-in.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c:106:6: error: no previous prototype for ‘arch_unregister_hw_breakpoint’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void arch_unregister_hw_breakpoint(struct perf_event *bp)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c:209:5: error: no previous prototype for ‘hw_breakpoint_handler’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
int hw_breakpoint_handler(struct die_args *args)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/hw_breakpoint.h | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
This commit add the prototypes for the following function:
- early_init
- machine_init
- ppc_setup_l2cr
- ppc_setup_l3cr
- ppc_init
the other missing ones were already added in setup.h previously. Fix the
following warnings (treated as error in W=1):
AR init/built-in.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:68:30: error: no previous prototype for ‘early_init’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
notrace unsigned long __init early_init(unsigned long dt_ptr)
^~~~~~~~~~
arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:99:21: error: no previous prototype for ‘machine_init’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
notrace void __init machine_init(u64 dt_ptr)
^~~~~~~~~~~~
arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:124:12: error: no previous prototype for ‘ppc_setup_l2cr’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
int __init ppc_setup_l2cr(char *str)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:137:12: error: no previous prototype for ‘ppc_setup_l3cr’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
int __init ppc_setup_l3cr(char *str)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:183:12: error: no previous prototype for ‘ppc_init’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
int __init ppc_init(void)
^~~~~~~~
arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:198:13: error: no previous prototype for ‘irqstack_early_init’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void __init irqstack_early_init(void)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:238:13: error: no previous prototype for ‘setup_power_save’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void __init setup_power_save(void)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c:253:13: error: no previous prototype for ‘initialize_cache_info’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
__init void initialize_cache_info(void)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/setup.h | 5 +++++
arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.c | 2 ++
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
Add missing prototypes for ppc_select & ppc_fadvise64_64 to header
asm-prototypes.h. Fix the following warnings (treated as errors in W=1)
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/syscalls.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/syscalls.c:87:1: error: no previous prototype for ‘ppc_select’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
ppc_select(int n, fd_set __user *inp, fd_set __user *outp, fd_set __user *exp, struct timeval __user *tvp)
^~~~~~~~~~
arch/powerpc/kernel/syscalls.c:119:6: error: no previous prototype for ‘ppc_fadvise64_64’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
long ppc_fadvise64_64(int fd, int advice, u32 offset_high, u32 offset_low,
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/asm-prototypes.h | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
Two functions did not have a prototype defined in signal.h header. Fix the
following two warnings (treated as errors in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:1135:6: error: no previous prototype for ‘sys_rt_sigreturn’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
long sys_rt_sigreturn(int r3, int r4, int r5, int r6, int r7, int r8,
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:1422:6: error: no previous prototype for ‘sys_sigreturn’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
long sys_sigreturn(int r3, int r4, int r5, int r6, int r7, int r8,
^~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal.h | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
In commit 81e7009ea46c ("powerpc: merge ppc signal.c and ppc64 signal32.c")
the function sys_debug_setcontext was added without a prototype.
Fix compilation warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:1227:5: error: no previous prototype for ‘sys_debug_setcontext’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
int sys_debug_setcontext(struct ucontext __user *ctx,
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/asm-prototypes.h | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
A function init_IRQ was added without a prototype declared in header irq.h.
Fix the following warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:662:13: error: no previous prototype for ‘init_IRQ’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void __init init_IRQ(void)
^~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/irq.h | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
Add a function declaration for MMU_setup at the beginning of the file to
fix a warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC kernel/sys.o
arch/powerpc/mm/init_32.c:102:13: error: no previous prototype for ‘MMU_setup’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void __init MMU_setup(void)
^~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/mm/init_32.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
In commit 4f8b50bbbe63 ("irq_work, ppc: Fix up arch hooks") a new function
arch_irq_work_raise was added without a prototype in header irq_work.h.
Fix the following warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/time.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c:523:6: error: no previous prototype for ‘arch_irq_work_raise’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void arch_irq_work_raise(void)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/irq_work.h | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
In commit 55ccf3fe3f9a ("fork: move the real prepare_to_copy() users to
arch_dup_task_struct()") a new arch_dup_task_struct was added without a
prototype declared in thread_info.h header. Fix the following warning
(treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/process.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c:1609:5: error: no previous prototype for ‘arch_dup_task_struct’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
int arch_dup_task_struct(struct task_struct *dst, struct task_struct *src)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/thread_info.h | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
The function time_init did not have a prototype defined in the time.h
header. Fix the following warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/time.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c:1068:13: error: no previous prototype for ‘time_init’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void __init time_init(void)
^~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/time.h | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
In commit dabe859ec636 ("powerpc: Give hypervisor decrementer interrupts
their own handler") an empty body function was added, but no prototype was
declared. Fix warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/time.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c:629:6: error: no previous prototype for ‘hdec_interrupt’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void hdec_interrupt(struct pt_regs *regs)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/time.h | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
In commit f0f558b131db ("powerpc/mm: Preserve CFAR value on SLB miss caused
by access to bogus address"), the function slb_miss_bad_addr was added
without a prototype. This commit adds it.
Fix a warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c:1498:6: error: no previous prototype for ‘slb_miss_bad_addr’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void slb_miss_bad_addr(struct pt_regs *regs)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/asm-prototypes.h | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
Since function `save_all` is not meant to be exported, change the signature
to `static`. Fix warning (treated as error with W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/process.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c:559:6: error: no previous prototype for ‘save_all’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void save_all(struct task_struct *tsk)
^~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
When CONFIG_PPC_FPU is defined the prototype exposed in asm/switch_to.h is:
extern void giveup_fpu(struct task_struct *);
Change the function prototype of __giveup_fpu to static. Fix warning
(treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/process.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c:176:6: error: no previous prototype for ‘__giveup_fpu’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void __giveup_fpu(struct task_struct *tsk)
^~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Change signature of two functions, adding static keyword to prevent the
following two warnings (treated as errors on W=1):
CC kernel/sys.o
arch/powerpc/platforms/embedded6xx/flipper-pic.c:135:28: error: no previous prototype for ‘flipper_pic_init’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
struct irq_domain * __init flipper_pic_init(struct device_node *np)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
and
CC arch/powerpc/platforms/embedded6xx/usbgecko_udbg.o
arch/powerpc/platforms/embedded6xx/usbgecko_udbg.c:172:6: error: no previous prototype for ‘ug_udbg_putc’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void ug_udbg_putc(char ch)
^~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/platforms/embedded6xx/flipper-pic.c | 2 +-
arch/powerpc/platforms/embedded6xx/usbgecko_udbg.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Rewrite check size - 1 <= Y as size < Y since `size` is unsigned value.
Fix warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
In file included from ./include/linux/uaccess.h:14:0,
from ./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:8,
from ./arch/powerpc/include/asm/termios.h:20,
from ./include/uapi/linux/termios.h:6,
from ./include/linux/tty.h:7,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:36:
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h: In function ‘user_termio_to_kernel_termios’:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:52:35: error: comparison of unsigned expression >= 0 is always true [-Werror=type-limits]
(((size) == 0) || (((size) - 1) <= ((segment).seg - (addr)))))
^
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:58:3: note: in expansion of macro ‘__access_ok’
__access_ok((__force unsigned long)(addr), (size), get_fs()))
^~~~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:262:6: note: in expansion of macro ‘access_ok’
if (access_ok(VERIFY_READ, __gu_addr, (size))) \
^~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:80:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__get_user_check’
__get_user_check((x), (ptr), sizeof(*(ptr)))
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:36:6: note: in expansion of macro ‘get_user’
if (get_user(termios->c_line, &termio->c_line) < 0)
^~~~~~~~
[...]
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Since the value of `tmp` is never intended to be read, declare both `tmp`
variables as unused. Fix warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c: In function ‘sys_swapcontext’:
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:1048:16: error: variable ‘tmp’ set but not used [-Werror=unused-but-set-variable]
unsigned char tmp;
^~~
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c: In function ‘sys_debug_setcontext’:
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:1234:16: error: variable ‘tmp’ set but not used [-Werror=unused-but-set-variable]
unsigned char tmp;
^~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Hi!
On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 06:22:16PM +0100, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
When neither CONFIG_ALTIVEC, nor CONFIG_VSX or CONFIG_PPC64 is defined, the
array feature_properties is defined as an empty array, which in turn
triggers the following warning (treated as error on W=1):
- for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++i, ++fp) {
+ for (; fp != feature_properties + ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++fp) {
You could just write != instead of < ? Seems more readable.
Maybe something can be done to ARRAY_SIZE to make this not warn.
Segher
Le 25/02/2018 à 18:22, Mathieu Malaterre a écrit :
quoted hunk
Rewrite comparison since all values compared are of type `unsigned long`.
Fix a warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.o
In file included from ./include/linux/bug.h:5:0,
from ./include/linux/cpumask.h:13,
from ./include/linux/smp.h:13,
from ./include/linux/kernel_stat.h:5,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:35:
./include/linux/dma-mapping.h: In function ‘dma_map_resource’:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h:129:32: error: comparison of unsigned expression >= 0 is always true [-Werror=type-limits]
#define pfn_valid(pfn) ((pfn) >= ARCH_PFN_OFFSET && (pfn) < max_mapnr)
^
Suggested-by: Segher Boessenkool <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Le 25/02/2018 à 18:22, Mathieu Malaterre a écrit :
quoted hunk
Rewrite check size - 1 <= Y as size < Y since `size` is unsigned value.
Fix warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
In file included from ./include/linux/uaccess.h:14:0,
from ./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:8,
from ./arch/powerpc/include/asm/termios.h:20,
from ./include/uapi/linux/termios.h:6,
from ./include/linux/tty.h:7,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:36:
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h: In function ‘user_termio_to_kernel_termios’:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:52:35: error: comparison of unsigned expression >= 0 is always true [-Werror=type-limits]
(((size) == 0) || (((size) - 1) <= ((segment).seg - (addr)))))
^
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:58:3: note: in expansion of macro ‘__access_ok’
__access_ok((__force unsigned long)(addr), (size), get_fs()))
^~~~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:262:6: note: in expansion of macro ‘access_ok’
if (access_ok(VERIFY_READ, __gu_addr, (size))) \
^~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:80:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__get_user_check’
__get_user_check((x), (ptr), sizeof(*(ptr)))
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:36:6: note: in expansion of macro ‘get_user’
if (get_user(termios->c_line, &termio->c_line) < 0)
^~~~~~~~
[...]
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Le 25/02/2018 à 18:22, Mathieu Malaterre a écrit :
quoted
Rewrite check size - 1 <= Y as size < Y since `size` is unsigned value.
Fix warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
In file included from ./include/linux/uaccess.h:14:0,
from ./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:8,
from ./arch/powerpc/include/asm/termios.h:20,
from ./include/uapi/linux/termios.h:6,
from ./include/linux/tty.h:7,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:36:
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h: In function
‘user_termio_to_kernel_termios’:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:52:35: error: comparison of
unsigned expression >= 0 is always true [-Werror=type-limits]
(((size) == 0) || (((size) - 1) <= ((segment).seg - (addr)))))
^
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:58:3: note: in expansion of macro
‘__access_ok’
__access_ok((__force unsigned long)(addr), (size), get_fs()))
^~~~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:262:6: note: in expansion of
macro ‘access_ok’
if (access_ok(VERIFY_READ, __gu_addr, (size))) \
^~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:80:2: note: in expansion of macro
‘__get_user_check’
__get_user_check((x), (ptr), sizeof(*(ptr)))
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:36:6: note: in expansion of macro
‘get_user’
if (get_user(termios->c_line, &termio->c_line) < 0)
^~~~~~~~
[...]
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h
b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h
index 51bfeb8777f0..fadc406bd39d 100644
Note that I already try to submit a fix for this warning 3 years ago
(https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/418075/) and it was rejected with
the following comment:
Again, I don't think Linux enables this warning. What did you do to
produce this? In any case, it's a bad warning that doesn't take macros
into account, and the answer is not to make the code less clear by hiding
the fact that zero is a special case.
Christophe
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 7:50 AM, Christophe LEROY
[off-list ref] wrote:
Le 26/02/2018 =C3=A0 07:34, Christophe LEROY a =C3=A9crit :
quoted
Le 25/02/2018 =C3=A0 18:22, Mathieu Malaterre a =C3=A9crit :
quoted
Rewrite check size - 1 <=3D Y as size < Y since `size` is unsigned valu=
e.
quoted
quoted
Fix warning (treated as error in W=3D1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
In file included from ./include/linux/uaccess.h:14:0,
from ./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:8,
from ./arch/powerpc/include/asm/termios.h:20,
from ./include/uapi/linux/termios.h:6,
from ./include/linux/tty.h:7,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:36:
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h: In function
=E2=80=98user_termio_to_kernel_termios=E2=80=99:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:52:35: error: comparison of unsign=
IIUC, ((2 - 1) <=3D 1) is the same as (2 < 1) ?????
The whole series was pretty mediocre, but this one was actually pretty
destructive. Thanks for catching this.
Note that I already try to submit a fix for this warning 3 years ago
(https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/418075/) and it was rejected with the
following comment:
Again, I don't think Linux enables this warning. What did you do to
produce this? In any case, it's a bad warning that doesn't take macros
into account, and the answer is not to make the code less clear by hiding
the fact that zero is a special case.
Right. I'll try to see how to make W=3D1 run without error with an
alternate solution.
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 7:32 AM, Christophe LEROY
[off-list ref] wrote:
Le 25/02/2018 =C3=A0 18:22, Mathieu Malaterre a =C3=A9crit :
quoted
Rewrite comparison since all values compared are of type `unsigned long`=
.
quoted
Fix a warning (treated as error in W=3D1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.o
In file included from ./include/linux/bug.h:5:0,
from ./include/linux/cpumask.h:13,
from ./include/linux/smp.h:13,
from ./include/linux/kernel_stat.h:5,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:35:
./include/linux/dma-mapping.h: In function =E2=80=98dma_map_resource=E2=
What will happen when ARCH_PFN_OFFSET is not nul and pfn is lower than
ARCH_PFN_OFFSET ?
It will work fine.
Say you are asking for a <= x < b so (in actual integers, no overflow)
that is 0 <= x-a < b-a and you also assume x-a overflows, so that we
are actually comparing x-a+M < b-a with M = 2**32 or such (the maximum
value in the unsigned integer type plus one). This comparison is
obviously always false.
(It also works if b < a btw).
Segher
From: Andy Shevchenko <hidden> Date: 2018-02-26 14:44:28
On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 7:22 PM, Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] wrote=
:
When neither CONFIG_ALTIVEC, nor CONFIG_VSX or CONFIG_PPC64 is defined, t=
he
array feature_properties is defined as an empty array, which in turn
triggers the following warning (treated as error on W=3D1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c: In function =E2=80=98check_cpu_feature_proper=
ties=E2=80=99:
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c:298:16: error: comparison of unsigned expressi=
on < 0 is always false [-Werror=3Dtype-limits]
quoted hunk
for (i =3D 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++i, ++fp) {
^
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 8:44 AM, Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] wrote=
:
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 7:50 AM, Christophe LEROY
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Le 26/02/2018 =C3=A0 07:34, Christophe LEROY a =C3=A9crit :
quoted
Le 25/02/2018 =C3=A0 18:22, Mathieu Malaterre a =C3=A9crit :
quoted
Rewrite check size - 1 <=3D Y as size < Y since `size` is unsigned val=
ue.
quoted
quoted
quoted
Fix warning (treated as error in W=3D1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
In file included from ./include/linux/uaccess.h:14:0,
from ./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:8,
from ./arch/powerpc/include/asm/termios.h:20,
from ./include/uapi/linux/termios.h:6,
from ./include/linux/tty.h:7,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:36:
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h: In function
=E2=80=98user_termio_to_kernel_termios=E2=80=99:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:52:35: error: comparison of unsig=
^
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:58:3: note: in expansion of macro
=E2=80=98__access_ok=E2=80=99
__access_ok((__force unsigned long)(addr), (size), get_fs()))
^~~~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:262:6: note: in expansion of macr=
o
quoted
quoted
quoted
=E2=80=98access_ok=E2=80=99
if (access_ok(VERIFY_READ, __gu_addr, (size))) \
^~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:80:2: note: in expansion of macro
=E2=80=98__get_user_check=E2=80=99
__get_user_check((x), (ptr), sizeof(*(ptr)))
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:36:6: note: in expansion of macro
=E2=80=98get_user=E2=80=99
if (get_user(termios->c_line, &termio->c_line) < 0)
^~~~~~~~
[...]
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h
b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h
index 51bfeb8777f0..fadc406bd39d 100644
Tested again today with gcc 6.3.0 and gcc is still producing the
original warning (treated as error).
quoted
Again, I don't think Linux enables this warning. What did you do to
produce this? In any case, it's a bad warning that doesn't take macros
into account, and the answer is not to make the code less clear by hidin=
g
quoted
the fact that zero is a special case.
Right. I'll try to see how to make W=3D1 run without error with an
alternate solution.
So the other alternative is to update a bunch of ppc32 defconfig(s)
with: CONFIG_PPC_DISABLE_WERROR=3Dy.
Would that be preferable ?
Le 26/02/2018 à 18:50, Mathieu Malaterre a écrit :
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 8:44 AM, Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 7:50 AM, Christophe LEROY
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Le 26/02/2018 à 07:34, Christophe LEROY a écrit :
quoted
Le 25/02/2018 à 18:22, Mathieu Malaterre a écrit :
quoted
Rewrite check size - 1 <= Y as size < Y since `size` is unsigned value.
Fix warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
In file included from ./include/linux/uaccess.h:14:0,
from ./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:8,
from ./arch/powerpc/include/asm/termios.h:20,
from ./include/uapi/linux/termios.h:6,
from ./include/linux/tty.h:7,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:36:
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h: In function
‘user_termio_to_kernel_termios’:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:52:35: error: comparison of unsigned
expression >= 0 is always true [-Werror=type-limits]
(((size) == 0) || (((size) - 1) <= ((segment).seg - (addr)))))
^
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:58:3: note: in expansion of macro
‘__access_ok’
__access_ok((__force unsigned long)(addr), (size), get_fs()))
^~~~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:262:6: note: in expansion of macro
‘access_ok’
if (access_ok(VERIFY_READ, __gu_addr, (size))) \
^~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:80:2: note: in expansion of macro
‘__get_user_check’
__get_user_check((x), (ptr), sizeof(*(ptr)))
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:36:6: note: in expansion of macro
‘get_user’
if (get_user(termios->c_line, &termio->c_line) < 0)
^~~~~~~~
[...]
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h
b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h
index 51bfeb8777f0..fadc406bd39d 100644
Tested again today with gcc 6.3.0 and gcc is still producing the
original warning (treated as error).
That's right, it seems that recent versions of gcc are not happy anymore
with that change.
Maybe Segher has a suggestion for that one ?
quoted
quoted
Again, I don't think Linux enables this warning. What did you do to
produce this? In any case, it's a bad warning that doesn't take macros
into account, and the answer is not to make the code less clear by hiding
the fact that zero is a special case.
Right. I'll try to see how to make W=1 run without error with an
alternate solution.
So the other alternative is to update a bunch of ppc32 defconfig(s)
with: CONFIG_PPC_DISABLE_WERROR=y.
Would that be preferable ?
No I don't think it is the solution. PPC is built with WERROR in order
to catch warnings on real problems.
You could disable it selectively when you want to run 'make W=1' and see
all possible warnings, then select by yourself which warnings are worth
fixing up.
Christophe
quoted
quoted
Christophe
quoted
Christophe
quoted
#endif
---
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Tested again today with gcc 6.3.0 and gcc is still producing the
original warning (treated as error).
That's right, it seems that recent versions of gcc are not happy anymore
with that change.
Maybe Segher has a suggestion for that one ?
Your patch:
#define __access_ok(addr, size, segment) \
(((addr) <= (segment).seg) && \
- (((size) == 0) || (((size) - 1) <= ((segment).seg - (addr)))))
+ (((size) <= 1) || (((size) - 1) <= ((segment).seg - (addr)))))
Is there any reason to write this as a macro? Let's make this more
readable:
static inline int __access_ok(unsigned long addr, unsigned long size,
mm_segment_t seg)
{
if (addr > seg.seg)
return 0;
return (size == 0 || size - 1 <= seg.seg - addr);
}
and I think we are done already, or will this warn for any input?
Segher
Le 27/02/2018 à 08:25, Mathieu Malaterre a écrit :
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 3:45 PM, Andy Shevchenko
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 4:44 PM, Andy Shevchenko
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 7:22 PM, Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
quoted
static void __init check_cpu_feature_properties(unsigned long node)
{
- unsigned long i;
struct feature_property *fp = feature_properties;
const __be32 *prop;
Much simpler is just add
if (ARRAY_SIZE() == 0)
return;
quoted
- for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++i, ++fp) {
+ for (; fp != feature_properties + ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++fp) {
...or convert to while(), which will be more readable.
So you'd prefer something like:
while (fp < feature_properties + ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties)) {
...
++fp;
}
right ?
Why not do as suggested by Segher, ie just replace < by != in the
original form ?
Or add in front:
if (!ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties))
return;
Christophe
From: Andy Shevchenko <hidden> Date: 2018-02-27 15:52:09
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] wrote:
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 8:33 AM, Christophe LEROY
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
Much simpler is just add
if (ARRAY_SIZE() == 0)
return;
quoted
Or add in front:
if (!ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties))
return;
(not tested) I believe the compiler still go over the for() loop and
will complain about the original unsigned comparison.
Did you run tests? Did you look into object file?
In kernel we much rely on the compiling away the code which is
deterministically not in use.
Here I'm pretty sure it will compile away entire function.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 4:52 PM, Andy Shevchenko
[off-list ref] wrote:
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] wro=
te:
quoted
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 8:33 AM, Christophe LEROY
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
Much simpler is just add
if (ARRAY_SIZE() =3D=3D 0)
return;
quoted
quoted
Or add in front:
if (!ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties))
return;
(not tested) I believe the compiler still go over the for() loop and
will complain about the original unsigned comparison.
Did you run tests? Did you look into object file?
The goal of this series is simply to remove warning treated as error.
I tried from home and I can still see the error using gcc 6.3.0, so
the original for() loop needs to be rewritten.
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c: In function =E2=80=98check_cpu_feature_properti=
es=E2=80=99:
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c:301:16: error: comparison of unsigned
expression < 0 is always false [-Werror=3Dtype-limits]
for (i =3D 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++i, ++fp) {
^
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
In kernel we much rely on the compiling away the code which is
deterministically not in use.
Here I'm pretty sure it will compile away entire function.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 05:52:06PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 8:33 AM, Christophe LEROY
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
Much simpler is just add
if (ARRAY_SIZE() == 0)
return;
quoted
quoted
Or add in front:
if (!ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties))
return;
(not tested) I believe the compiler still go over the for() loop and
will complain about the original unsigned comparison.
Did you run tests? Did you look into object file?
In kernel we much rely on the compiling away the code which is
deterministically not in use.
Here I'm pretty sure it will compile away entire function.
It does, but it also still warns (this warning is done very early in the
compiler pipeline).
Segher
From: Andy Shevchenko <hidden> Date: 2018-02-28 17:08:33
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 10:42 PM, Segher Boessenkool
[off-list ref] wrote:
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 05:52:06PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 8:33 AM, Christophe LEROY
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
Much simpler is just add
if (ARRAY_SIZE() == 0)
return;
quoted
quoted
Or add in front:
if (!ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties))
return;
(not tested) I believe the compiler still go over the for() loop and
will complain about the original unsigned comparison.
Did you run tests? Did you look into object file?
In kernel we much rely on the compiling away the code which is
deterministically not in use.
Here I'm pretty sure it will compile away entire function.
It does, but it also still warns (this warning is done very early in the
compiler pipeline).
Oh, I see.
Then the while () approach looks to me the best here.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> Date: 2018-03-01 02:56:03
Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] writes:
When neither CONFIG_ALTIVEC, nor CONFIG_VSX or CONFIG_PPC64 is defined, t=
he
array feature_properties is defined as an empty array, which in turn
triggers the following warning (treated as error on W=3D1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c: In function =E2=80=98check_cpu_feature_proper=
ties=E2=80=99:
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c:298:16: error: comparison of unsigned expressi=
on < 0 is always false [-Werror=3Dtype-limits]
for (i =3D 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++i, ++fp) {
^
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Michael Ellerman [off-list ref] wrote=
:
Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
When neither CONFIG_ALTIVEC, nor CONFIG_VSX or CONFIG_PPC64 is defined, =
the
quoted
array feature_properties is defined as an empty array, which in turn
triggers the following warning (treated as error on W=3D1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c: In function =E2=80=98check_cpu_feature_prope=
rties=E2=80=99:
quoted
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c:298:16: error: comparison of unsigned express=
ion < 0 is always false [-Werror=3Dtype-limits]
quoted hunk
quoted
for (i =3D 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++i, ++fp) {
^
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
static void __init check_cpu_feature_properties(unsigned long node)
{
- unsigned long i;
struct feature_property *fp =3D feature_properties;
const __be32 *prop;
+ int i;
- for (i =3D 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++i, ++fp) {
+ for (i =3D 0; i < (int)ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++i, ++fp)=
Indeed that looks like the less invasive solution, I'll re-submit.
Should I resubmit the entire patch series (21 indep patches) or
re-submit only the 3 patches that were discussed (as part of a
different series) ?
Thanks
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> Date: 2018-03-01 09:33:43
Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] writes:
On Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Michael Ellerman [off-list ref] wro=
te:
quoted
Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
When neither CONFIG_ALTIVEC, nor CONFIG_VSX or CONFIG_PPC64 is defined,=
the
quoted
quoted
array feature_properties is defined as an empty array, which in turn
triggers the following warning (treated as error on W=3D1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c: In function =E2=80=98check_cpu_feature_prop=
erties=E2=80=99:
quoted
quoted
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c:298:16: error: comparison of unsigned expres=
sion < 0 is always false [-Werror=3Dtype-limits]
quoted
quoted
for (i =3D 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++i, ++fp) {
^
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
static void __init check_cpu_feature_properties(unsigned long node)
{
- unsigned long i;
struct feature_property *fp =3D feature_properties;
const __be32 *prop;
+ int i;
- for (i =3D 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++i, ++fp) {
+ for (i =3D 0; i < (int)ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++i, ++fp=
Indeed that looks like the less invasive solution, I'll re-submit.
Thanks.
Should I resubmit the entire patch series (21 indep patches) or
re-submit only the 3 patches that were discussed (as part of a
different series) ?
Just resubmit the ones that need changes. You can either send them as a
new series of 3, or post each as a reply to the original patch with v2
in the subject.
cheers
When neither CONFIG_ALTIVEC, nor CONFIG_VSX or CONFIG_PPC64 is defined, the
array feature_properties is defined as an empty array, which in turn
triggers the following warning (treated as error on W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c: In function ‘check_cpu_feature_properties’:
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c:298:16: error: comparison of unsigned expression < 0 is always false [-Werror=type-limits]
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++i, ++fp) {
^
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Suggested-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Rewrite function-like macro into regular static inline function to avoid a
warning during macro expansion.
Fix warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
In file included from ./include/linux/uaccess.h:14:0,
from ./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:8,
from ./arch/powerpc/include/asm/termios.h:20,
from ./include/uapi/linux/termios.h:6,
from ./include/linux/tty.h:7,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:36:
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h: In function ‘user_termio_to_kernel_termios’:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:52:35: error: comparison of unsigned expression >= 0 is always true [-Werror=type-limits]
(((size) == 0) || (((size) - 1) <= ((segment).seg - (addr)))))
^
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:58:3: note: in expansion of macro ‘__access_ok’
__access_ok((__force unsigned long)(addr), (size), get_fs()))
^~~~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:262:6: note: in expansion of macro ‘access_ok’
if (access_ok(VERIFY_READ, __gu_addr, (size))) \
^~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:80:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__get_user_check’
__get_user_check((x), (ptr), sizeof(*(ptr)))
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:36:6: note: in expansion of macro ‘get_user’
if (get_user(termios->c_line, &termio->c_line) < 0)
^~~~~~~~
[...]
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Suggested-by: Segher Boessenkool <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h | 10 +++++++---
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Le 02/03/2018 à 20:50, Mathieu Malaterre a écrit :
Rewrite function-like macro into regular static inline function to avoid a
warning during macro expansion.
Fix warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
In file included from ./include/linux/uaccess.h:14:0,
from ./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:8,
from ./arch/powerpc/include/asm/termios.h:20,
from ./include/uapi/linux/termios.h:6,
from ./include/linux/tty.h:7,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:36:
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h: In function ‘user_termio_to_kernel_termios’:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:52:35: error: comparison of unsigned expression >= 0 is always true [-Werror=type-limits]
(((size) == 0) || (((size) - 1) <= ((segment).seg - (addr)))))
^
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:58:3: note: in expansion of macro ‘__access_ok’
__access_ok((__force unsigned long)(addr), (size), get_fs()))
^~~~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:262:6: note: in expansion of macro ‘access_ok’
if (access_ok(VERIFY_READ, __gu_addr, (size))) \
^~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:80:2: note: in expansion of macro ‘__get_user_check’
__get_user_check((x), (ptr), sizeof(*(ptr)))
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:36:6: note: in expansion of macro ‘get_user’
if (get_user(termios->c_line, &termio->c_line) < 0)
^~~~~~~~
[...]
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Suggested-by: Segher Boessenkool <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
What will happen when ARCH_PFN_OFFSET is not nul and pfn is lower than
ARCH_PFN_OFFSET ?
It will work fine.
Say you are asking for a <= x < b so (in actual integers, no overflow)
that is 0 <= x-a < b-a and you also assume x-a overflows, so that we
are actually comparing x-a+M < b-a with M = 2**32 or such (the maximum
value in the unsigned integer type plus one). This comparison is
obviously always false.
(It also works if b < a btw).
Thanks Segher !
Christophe does that clarify things or do you want me to update the
commit message ?
No it is fine for me.
Reviewed-by: Christophe Leroy <redacted>
---
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> Date: 2018-03-04 10:54:13
Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] writes:
Re-use the object-like macro EARLYCON_USED_OR_UNUSED to mark
`earlycon_acpi_spcr_enable` as maybe_unused.
Fix the following warning (treated as error in W=3D1)
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.o
In file included from ./include/linux/serial_8250.h:14:0,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c:33:
./include/linux/serial_core.h:382:19: error: =E2=80=98earlycon_acpi_spcr_=
enable=E2=80=99 defined but not used [-Werror=3Dunused-const-variable=3D]
static const bool earlycon_acpi_spcr_enable;
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
include/linux/serial_core.h | 1 +
I can't take this one as that's not a file I maintain.
The script says:
$ ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl include/linux/serial_core.h
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
jslaby@suse.com
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Can you resend it to them?
The macro eventually turns into an __attribute__, which I think is
typically placed after the variable, so eg:
static const bool earlycon_acpi_spcr_enable EARLYCON_USED_OR_UNUSED;
cheers
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> Date: 2018-03-04 10:54:20
Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] writes:
Add a function declaration for MMU_setup at the beginning of the file to
fix a warning (treated as error in W=3D1):
CC kernel/sys.o
arch/powerpc/mm/init_32.c:102:13: error: no previous prototype for =E2=80=
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> Date: 2018-03-04 10:54:34
Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] writes:
In commit 81e7009ea46c ("powerpc: merge ppc signal.c and ppc64 signal32.c=
")
the function sys_debug_setcontext was added without a prototype.
Fix compilation warning (treated as error in W=3D1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:1227:5: error: no previous prototype for =
int sys_debug_setcontext(struct ucontext __user *ctx,
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
This one should actually be using the SYSCALL_DEFINE syntax, so that it
can be used with CONFIG_FTRACE_SYSCALLS.
See eg. our mmap:
SYSCALL_DEFINE6(mmap, unsigned long, addr, size_t, len,
unsigned long, prot, unsigned long, flags,
unsigned long, fd, off_t, offset)
{
return do_mmap2(addr, len, prot, flags, fd, offset, PAGE_SHIFT);
}
We probably still need this patch, but I'm not entirely sure because the
SYSCALL_DEFINE macro does all sorts of shenanigans.
cheers
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> Date: 2018-03-04 10:55:22
Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] writes:
Rewrite comparison since all values compared are of type `unsigned long`.
Fix a warning (treated as error in W=3D1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.o
In file included from ./include/linux/bug.h:5:0,
from ./include/linux/cpumask.h:13,
from ./include/linux/smp.h:13,
from ./include/linux/kernel_stat.h:5,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:35:
./include/linux/dma-mapping.h: In function =E2=80=98dma_map_resource=E2=
=80=99:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h:129:32: error: comparison of unsigned e=
xpression >=3D 0 is always true [-Werror=3Dtype-limits]
I'm not a big fan of this one, because the original code is *far* more
obvious as to what it's doing.
I'm not sure if we can make this one a static inline, or whether that
would help, but it would be worth investigating.
cheers
Rewrite comparison since all values compared are of type `unsigned long`.
Fix a warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.o
In file included from ./include/linux/bug.h:5:0,
from ./include/linux/cpumask.h:13,
from ./include/linux/smp.h:13,
from ./include/linux/kernel_stat.h:5,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:35:
./include/linux/dma-mapping.h: In function ‘dma_map_resource’:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h:129:32: error: comparison of unsigned expression >= 0 is always true [-Werror=type-limits]
#define pfn_valid(pfn) ((pfn) >= ARCH_PFN_OFFSET && (pfn) < max_mapnr)
^
Suggested-by: Segher Boessenkool <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
I'm not a big fan of this one, because the original code is *far* more
obvious as to what it's doing.
I'm not sure if we can make this one a static inline, or whether that
would help, but it would be worth investigating.
The following seems to give a good result:
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h
b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h
index 8da5d4c1cab2..6f74938483b7 100644
Since function `MMU_setup` is not meant to be exported, change the
signature to `static`. Fix warning (treated as error with W=1):
CC kernel/sys.o
arch/powerpc/mm/init_32.c:102:13: error: no previous prototype for ‘MMU_setup’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void __init MMU_setup(void)
^~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/mm/init_32.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Rewrite comparison since all values compared are of type `unsigned long`.
Instead of using unsigned properties and rewriting the original code as:
(originally suggested by Segher Boessenkool [off-list ref])
#define pfn_valid(pfn) \
(((pfn) - ARCH_PFN_OFFSET) < (max_mapnr - ARCH_PFN_OFFSET))
Prefer a static inline function to make code as readable as possible.
Fix a warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.o
In file included from ./include/linux/bug.h:5:0,
from ./include/linux/cpumask.h:13,
from ./include/linux/smp.h:13,
from ./include/linux/kernel_stat.h:5,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:35:
./include/linux/dma-mapping.h: In function ‘dma_map_resource’:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h:129:32: error: comparison of unsigned expression >= 0 is always true [-Werror=type-limits]
#define pfn_valid(pfn) ((pfn) >= ARCH_PFN_OFFSET && (pfn) < max_mapnr)
^
Suggested-by: Christophe Leroy <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h | 10 +++++++++-
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 11:54 AM, Michael Ellerman [off-list ref] wrot=
e:
Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
In commit 81e7009ea46c ("powerpc: merge ppc signal.c and ppc64 signal32.=
c")
quoted
the function sys_debug_setcontext was added without a prototype.
Fix compilation warning (treated as error in W=3D1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:1227:5: error: no previous prototype for=
int sys_debug_setcontext(struct ucontext __user *ctx,
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
This one should actually be using the SYSCALL_DEFINE syntax, so that it
can be used with CONFIG_FTRACE_SYSCALLS.
See eg. our mmap:
SYSCALL_DEFINE6(mmap, unsigned long, addr, size_t, len,
unsigned long, prot, unsigned long, flags,
unsigned long, fd, off_t, offset)
{
return do_mmap2(addr, len, prot, flags, fd, offset, PAGE_SHIFT);
}
We probably still need this patch, but I'm not entirely sure because the
SYSCALL_DEFINE macro does all sorts of shenanigans.
I see. Could you please drop this patch then. The patch does not look
that trivial anymore. I'll need to dig a bit more on how to do the
syscall stuff with a 7 params function.
Thanks
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> Date: 2018-03-08 10:37:01
Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] writes:
On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 11:54 AM, Michael Ellerman [off-list ref] wr=
ote:
quoted
Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
In commit 81e7009ea46c ("powerpc: merge ppc signal.c and ppc64 signal32=
.c")
quoted
quoted
the function sys_debug_setcontext was added without a prototype.
Fix compilation warning (treated as error in W=3D1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:1227:5: error: no previous prototype fo=
r =E2=80=98sys_debug_setcontext=E2=80=99 [-Werror=3Dmissing-prototypes]
quoted
quoted
int sys_debug_setcontext(struct ucontext __user *ctx,
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
This one should actually be using the SYSCALL_DEFINE syntax, so that it
can be used with CONFIG_FTRACE_SYSCALLS.
See eg. our mmap:
SYSCALL_DEFINE6(mmap, unsigned long, addr, size_t, len,
unsigned long, prot, unsigned long, flags,
unsigned long, fd, off_t, offset)
{
return do_mmap2(addr, len, prot, flags, fd, offset, PAGE_SHIFT);
}
We probably still need this patch, but I'm not entirely sure because the
SYSCALL_DEFINE macro does all sorts of shenanigans.
I see. Could you please drop this patch then. The patch does not look
that trivial anymore. I'll need to dig a bit more on how to do the
syscall stuff with a 7 params function.
Ergh, yuck, seems we're the first suckers to need do that.
I think I'll take this patch for now, it's still good for now at least,
and then the SYSCALL_DEFINE stuff can be an addition.
cheers
On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 11:54 AM, Michael Ellerman [off-list ref] wrot=
e:
Mathieu Malaterre [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Re-use the object-like macro EARLYCON_USED_OR_UNUSED to mark
`earlycon_acpi_spcr_enable` as maybe_unused.
Fix the following warning (treated as error in W=3D1)
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.o
In file included from ./include/linux/serial_8250.h:14:0,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/setup-common.c:33:
./include/linux/serial_core.h:382:19: error: =E2=80=98earlycon_acpi_spcr=
_enable=E2=80=99 defined but not used [-Werror=3Dunused-const-variable=3D]
quoted
static const bool earlycon_acpi_spcr_enable;
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
---
include/linux/serial_core.h | 1 +
I can't take this one as that's not a file I maintain.
The script says:
$ ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl include/linux/serial_core.h
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
jslaby@suse.com
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Can you resend it to them?
The macro eventually turns into an __attribute__, which I think is
typically placed after the variable, so eg:
static const bool earlycon_acpi_spcr_enable EARLYCON_USED_OR_UNUSED;
Indeed makes it more consistent with style. Thanks!
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2018-03-14 09:27:52
On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 17:22:17 UTC, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
The inline keyword was not at the beginning of the function declaration.
Fix the following warning (treated as error in W=1)
CC kernel/sys.o
arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c:283:1: error: ���inline��� is not at beginning of declaration [-Werror=old-style-declaration]
static int nokprobe_inline copy_mem_in(u8 *dest, unsigned long ea, int nb,
^~~~~~
arch/powerpc/lib/sstep.c:388:1: error: ���inline��� is not at beginning of declaration [-Werror=old-style-declaration]
static int nokprobe_inline copy_mem_out(u8 *dest, unsigned long ea, int nb,
^~~~~~
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_32.o
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2018-03-14 09:27:55
On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 17:22:22 UTC, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
Change signature of two functions, adding static keyword to prevent the
following two warnings (treated as errors on W=1):
CC kernel/sys.o
arch/powerpc/platforms/embedded6xx/flipper-pic.c:135:28: error: no previous prototype for ���flipper_pic_init��� [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
struct irq_domain * __init flipper_pic_init(struct device_node *np)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
and
CC arch/powerpc/platforms/embedded6xx/usbgecko_udbg.o
arch/powerpc/platforms/embedded6xx/usbgecko_udbg.c:172:6: error: no previous prototype for ���ug_udbg_putc��� [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void ug_udbg_putc(char ch)
^~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2018-03-14 09:27:57
On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 17:22:19 UTC, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
Since the value of `tmp` is never intended to be read, declare both `tmp`
variables as unused. Fix warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c: In function ���sys_swapcontext���:
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:1048:16: error: variable ���tmp��� set but not used [-Werror=unused-but-set-variable]
unsigned char tmp;
^~~
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c: In function ���sys_debug_setcontext���:
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:1234:16: error: variable ���tmp��� set but not used [-Werror=unused-but-set-variable]
unsigned char tmp;
^~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2018-03-14 09:27:59
On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 17:22:25 UTC, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
In commit f0f558b131db ("powerpc/mm: Preserve CFAR value on SLB miss caused
by access to bogus address"), the function slb_miss_bad_addr was added
without a prototype. This commit adds it.
Fix a warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c:1498:6: error: no previous prototype for ���slb_miss_bad_addr��� [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void slb_miss_bad_addr(struct pt_regs *regs)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2018-03-14 09:28:00
On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 17:22:26 UTC, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
In commit dabe859ec636 ("powerpc: Give hypervisor decrementer interrupts
their own handler") an empty body function was added, but no prototype was
declared. Fix warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/time.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c:629:6: error: no previous prototype for ���hdec_interrupt��� [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void hdec_interrupt(struct pt_regs *regs)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2018-03-14 09:28:08
On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 17:22:28 UTC, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
In commit 55ccf3fe3f9a ("fork: move the real prepare_to_copy() users to
arch_dup_task_struct()") a new arch_dup_task_struct was added without a
prototype declared in thread_info.h header. Fix the following warning
(treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/process.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c:1609:5: error: no previous prototype for ���arch_dup_task_struct��� [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
int arch_dup_task_struct(struct task_struct *dst, struct task_struct *src)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2018-03-14 09:28:14
On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 17:22:29 UTC, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
In commit 4f8b50bbbe63 ("irq_work, ppc: Fix up arch hooks") a new function
arch_irq_work_raise was added without a prototype in header irq_work.h.
Fix the following warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/time.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/time.c:523:6: error: no previous prototype for ���arch_irq_work_raise��� [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void arch_irq_work_raise(void)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2018-03-14 09:28:15
On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 17:22:31 UTC, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
A function init_IRQ was added without a prototype declared in header irq.h.
Fix the following warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:662:13: error: no previous prototype for ���init_IRQ��� [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void __init init_IRQ(void)
^~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2018-03-14 09:28:19
On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 17:22:33 UTC, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
Two functions did not have a prototype defined in signal.h header. Fix the
following two warnings (treated as errors in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:1135:6: error: no previous prototype for ���sys_rt_sigreturn��� [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
long sys_rt_sigreturn(int r3, int r4, int r5, int r6, int r7, int r8,
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:1422:6: error: no previous prototype for ���sys_sigreturn��� [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
long sys_sigreturn(int r3, int r4, int r5, int r6, int r7, int r8,
^~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2018-03-14 09:28:23
On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 17:22:34 UTC, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
In commit 5aae8a537080 ("powerpc, hw_breakpoints: Implement hw_breakpoints
for 64-bit server processors") function hw_breakpoint_handler and
arch_unregister_hw_breakpoint were added without function prototypes in
hw_breakpoint.h header.
Fix the following warning(s) (treated as error in W=1):
AR init/built-in.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c:106:6: error: no previous prototype for ���arch_unregister_hw_breakpoint��� [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void arch_unregister_hw_breakpoint(struct perf_event *bp)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
arch/powerpc/kernel/hw_breakpoint.c:209:5: error: no previous prototype for ���hw_breakpoint_handler��� [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
int hw_breakpoint_handler(struct die_args *args)
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2018-03-14 09:28:25
On Sun, 2018-02-25 at 17:22:23 UTC, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
When CONFIG_PPC_FPU is defined the prototype exposed in asm/switch_to.h is:
extern void giveup_fpu(struct task_struct *);
Change the function prototype of __giveup_fpu to static. Fix warning
(treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/process.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/process.c:176:6: error: no previous prototype for ���__giveup_fpu��� [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void __giveup_fpu(struct task_struct *tsk)
^~~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2018-03-14 09:28:36
On Fri, 2018-03-02 at 19:49:18 UTC, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
When neither CONFIG_ALTIVEC, nor CONFIG_VSX or CONFIG_PPC64 is defined, the
array feature_properties is defined as an empty array, which in turn
triggers the following warning (treated as error on W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.o
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c: In function ���check_cpu_feature_properties���:
arch/powerpc/kernel/prom.c:298:16: error: comparison of unsigned expression < 0 is always false [-Werror=type-limits]
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(feature_properties); ++i, ++fp) {
^
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Suggested-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2018-03-14 09:28:45
On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 20:34:35 UTC, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
Rewrite comparison since all values compared are of type `unsigned long`.
Instead of using unsigned properties and rewriting the original code as:
(originally suggested by Segher Boessenkool [off-list ref])
#define pfn_valid(pfn) \
(((pfn) - ARCH_PFN_OFFSET) < (max_mapnr - ARCH_PFN_OFFSET))
Prefer a static inline function to make code as readable as possible.
Fix a warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.o
In file included from ./include/linux/bug.h:5:0,
from ./include/linux/cpumask.h:13,
from ./include/linux/smp.h:13,
from ./include/linux/kernel_stat.h:5,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/irq.c:35:
./include/linux/dma-mapping.h: In function ���dma_map_resource���:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/page.h:129:32: error: comparison of unsigned expression >= 0 is always true [-Werror=type-limits]
#define pfn_valid(pfn) ((pfn) >= ARCH_PFN_OFFSET && (pfn) < max_mapnr)
^
Suggested-by: Christophe Leroy <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2018-03-14 09:28:49
On Fri, 2018-03-02 at 19:50:51 UTC, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
Rewrite function-like macro into regular static inline function to avoid a
warning during macro expansion.
Fix warning (treated as error in W=1):
CC arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.o
In file included from ./include/linux/uaccess.h:14:0,
from ./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:8,
from ./arch/powerpc/include/asm/termios.h:20,
from ./include/uapi/linux/termios.h:6,
from ./include/linux/tty.h:7,
from arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:36:
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h: In function ���user_termio_to_kernel_termios���:
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:52:35: error: comparison of unsigned expression >= 0 is always true [-Werror=type-limits]
(((size) == 0) || (((size) - 1) <= ((segment).seg - (addr)))))
^
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:58:3: note: in expansion of macro ���__access_ok���
__access_ok((__force unsigned long)(addr), (size), get_fs()))
^~~~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:262:6: note: in expansion of macro ���access_ok���
if (access_ok(VERIFY_READ, __gu_addr, (size))) \
^~~~~~~~~
./arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h:80:2: note: in expansion of macro ���__get_user_check���
__get_user_check((x), (ptr), sizeof(*(ptr)))
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
./include/asm-generic/termios-base.h:36:6: note: in expansion of macro ���get_user���
if (get_user(termios->c_line, &termio->c_line) < 0)
^~~~~~~~
[...]
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Suggested-by: Segher Boessenkool <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>
Reviewed-by: Christophe Leroy <redacted>
From: Michael Ellerman <hidden> Date: 2018-03-14 09:30:03
On Wed, 2018-03-07 at 20:32:55 UTC, Mathieu Malaterre wrote:
Since function `MMU_setup` is not meant to be exported, change the
signature to `static`. Fix warning (treated as error with W=1):
CC kernel/sys.o
arch/powerpc/mm/init_32.c:102:13: error: no previous prototype for ���MMU_setup��� [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
void __init MMU_setup(void)
^~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <redacted>