From: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
To: Victor Erminpour <victor.erminpour@oracle.com>,
lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com
Cc: guohanjun@huawei.com, sudeep.holla@arm.com, rafael@kernel.org,
lenb@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, trivial@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI/IORT: Fix GCC 12 warning
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2022 18:35:45 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7b2761d1-3b4e-d725-cd8d-79591fe9bd86@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <85bbc0e8-7709-71bc-41ba-9c2f0b2e717d@oracle.com>
On 2022-02-10 18:27, Victor Erminpour wrote:
>
> On 2/10/22 10:06 AM, Robin Murphy wrote:
>> On 2022-02-10 00:32, Victor Erminpour wrote:
>>> When building with automatic stack variable initialization, GCC 12
>>> complains about variables defined outside of switch case statements.
>>> Move the variable into the case that uses it, which silences the
>>> warning:
>>>
>>> ./drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c:1670:59: error: statement will never be
>>> executed [-Werror=switch-unreachable]
>>> 1670 | struct acpi_iort_named_component
>>> *ncomp;
>>> | ^~~~~
>>
>> Notwithstanding the fact that that warning is nonsensical, this patch
>> changes valid C code into invalid C code that doesn't even compile:
>>
>> drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c: In function
>> ‘acpi_iort_dma_get_max_cpu_address’:
>> drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c:1669:4: error: a label can only be part of a
>> statement and a declaration is not a statement
>> 1669 | struct acpi_iort_named_component *ncomp;
>> | ^~~~~~
>> drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c:1676:4: error: a label can only be part of a
>> statement and a declaration is not a statement
>> 1676 | struct acpi_iort_root_complex *rc;
>> | ^~~~~~
>>
>> Robin.
>>
>
> Hi Robin,
>
> Thank you for your constructive criticism.
> Could the solution be enclosing the case statement in curly braces?
>
> I know this isn't a big issue for you, but this is a legitimate error
> for people
> building the kernel with GCC 12 and CONFIG_INIT_STACK_ALL_ZERO enabled.
As Ard pointed out first, it is not a legitimate error, it is a spurious
error. The fact that you seemingly didn't get the label errors above,
nor even "ISO C90 forbids mixed declarations and code
[-Wdeclaration-after-statement]", implies that GCC 12 currently has a
completely broken notion of declarations vs. statements with that option
enabled, so GCC 12 needs fixing.
Robin.
>
> Regards,
> --Victor
>
>
>
>>> Signed-off-by: Victor Erminpour <victor.erminpour@oracle.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c | 8 +++-----
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c b/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
>>> index 3b23fb775ac4..5c5d2e56d756 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/arm64/iort.c
>>> @@ -1645,7 +1645,7 @@ void __init acpi_iort_init(void)
>>> */
>>> phys_addr_t __init acpi_iort_dma_get_max_cpu_address(void)
>>> {
>>> - phys_addr_t limit = PHYS_ADDR_MAX;
>>> + phys_addr_t local_limit, limit = PHYS_ADDR_MAX;
>>> struct acpi_iort_node *node, *end;
>>> struct acpi_table_iort *iort;
>>> acpi_status status;
>>> @@ -1667,17 +1667,15 @@ phys_addr_t __init
>>> acpi_iort_dma_get_max_cpu_address(void)
>>> break;
>>> switch (node->type) {
>>> - struct acpi_iort_named_component *ncomp;
>>> - struct acpi_iort_root_complex *rc;
>>> - phys_addr_t local_limit;
>>> -
>>> case ACPI_IORT_NODE_NAMED_COMPONENT:
>>> + struct acpi_iort_named_component *ncomp;
>>> ncomp = (struct acpi_iort_named_component
>>> *)node->node_data;
>>> local_limit = DMA_BIT_MASK(ncomp->memory_address_limit);
>>> limit = min_not_zero(limit, local_limit);
>>> break;
>>> case ACPI_IORT_NODE_PCI_ROOT_COMPLEX:
>>> + struct acpi_iort_root_complex *rc;
>>> if (node->revision < 1)
>>> break;
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
>>> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!ZcNRWTaQIb1uVqcZAusSzXd2kBnWuqAuICpxkOm6bOWBouQoFygbcIMJVUNp34LqhNrc$
>>
>>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-10 18:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-10 0:32 Victor Erminpour
2022-02-10 9:11 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-02-10 17:36 ` Victor Erminpour
2022-02-10 19:29 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-02-10 19:39 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2022-02-10 18:06 ` Robin Murphy
2022-02-10 18:27 ` Victor Erminpour
2022-02-10 18:35 ` Robin Murphy [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7b2761d1-3b4e-d725-cd8d-79591fe9bd86@arm.com \
--to=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=trivial@kernel.org \
--cc=victor.erminpour@oracle.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®