> On Sep 1, 2020, at 5:46 AM, Kim Barrett <kim.barr...@oracle.com> wrote: > >> On Sep 1, 2020, at 4:01 AM, Eric Liu <eric.c....@arm.com> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> Please review this simple change to fix some compile warnings. >> >> The newer gcc (gcc-8 or higher) would warn for calls to bounded string >> manipulation functions such as 'strncpy' that may either truncate the >> copied string or leave the destination unchanged. >> >> This patch fixed stringop-truncation warnings reported by gcc, some of >> them only appear when compiled with "--enable-asan". >> >> [TESTS] >> Jtreg: hotspot::hotspot_all_no_apps, jdk::jdk_core and langtools::tier1. >> No new failure found. >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~qfeng/ericliu/jdk/stringop_trunc/webrev.00/ >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8252407 >> >> Thanks, >> Eric > > I really hate -Wstringop-truncation. It's been a constant source of churn > for us ever since it appeared. The changes being made to getIndex and > getFlags (NetworkInterface.c) are modifying lines that were changed very > recently to deal with such warnings from gcc10. I'm worried that these new > changes will re-trigger warnings from gcc10 (though this change isn't a > revert; the gcc10 warning was justifiable). I think it should be okay, but > there’s some risk here. > > Changes look good, subject to that caveat.
Apparently I forgot about the discussion of the casted enum, so belay that. > I think these changes conform > better to the documented description of the warning than did the recent > NetworkInterface.c change mentioned above, so I’m hopeful that we’re not > in a warning cycle here. But it would be good to have someone test these > changes against gcc10.x.