On 6/27/16, 3:46 AM, "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson at intel.com> wrote:
>On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 10:54:12AM -0500, Keith Wiles wrote:
>> Latest clang compiler 3.8.0 on latest update of Ubuntu
>> creates a few more warnings on -Warray-bounds and extra
>> () around 'if' expressions.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Keith Wiles <keith.wiles at intel.com>
>> ---
>> app/test-pmd/Makefile | 3 +++
>> app/test/Makefile | 3 +++
>> drivers/net/bonding/Makefile | 4 ++++
>> drivers/net/fm10k/Makefile | 2 ++
>> drivers/net/i40e/Makefile | 2 ++
>> lib/librte_cmdline/Makefile | 6 ++++++
>> lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/Makefile | 8 ++++++++
>> 7 files changed, 28 insertions(+)
>>
>All the fixes in this patch seem to be just disabling the compiler warnings,
>which
>should really be the last resort in cases like this. Can some of the issues be
>fixed by actually fixing the issues in the code?
I did look at the code to fix the problem, because I could not see one:
/work/home/rkwiles/projects/intel/dpdk/app/test-pmd/cmdline.c:3357:2140: error:
array index 3 is past the end of the array (which contains 3 elements)
[-Werror,-Warray-bounds]
if (!__extension__ ({ size_t __s1_len, __s2_len; (__builtin_constant_p
(res->proto) && __builtin_constant_p ("ip") && (__s1_len = __builtin_strlen
(res->proto), __s2_len = __builtin_strlen ("ip"), (!((size_t)(const void
*)((res->proto) + 1) - (size_t)(const void *)(res->proto) == 1) || __s1_len >=
4) && (!((size_t)(const void *)(("ip") + 1) - (size_t)(const void *)("ip") ==
1) || __s2_len >= 4)) ? __builtin_strcmp (res->proto, "ip") :
(__builtin_constant_p (res->proto) && ((size_t)(const void *)((res->proto) + 1)
- (size_t)(const void *)(res->proto) == 1) && (__s1_len = __builtin_strlen
(res->proto), __s1_len < 4) ? (__builtin_constant_p ("ip") && ((size_t)(const
void *)(("ip") + 1) - (size_t)(const void *)("ip") == 1) ? __builtin_strcmp
(res->proto, "ip") : (__extension__ ({ const unsigned char *__s2 = (const
unsigned char *) (const char *) ("ip"); int __result = (((const unsigned char
*) (const char *) (res->proto))[0] - __s2[0]); if (__s1_len > 0 && __result ==
0) { __result = (((const unsigned char *) (const char *) (res->proto))[1] -
__s2[1]); if (__s1_len > 1 && __result == 0) { __result = (((const unsigned
char *) (const char *) (res->proto))[2] - __s2[2]); if (__s1_len > 2 &&
__result == 0) __result = (((const unsigned char *) (const char *)
(res->proto))[3] - __s2[3]); } } __result; }))) : (__builtin_constant_p ("ip")
&& ((size_t)(const void *)(("ip") + 1) - (size_t)(const void *)("ip") == 1) &&
(__s2_len = __builtin_strlen ("ip"), __s2_len < 4) ? (__builtin_constant_p
(res->proto) && ((size_t)(const void *)((res->proto) + 1) - (size_t)(const void
*)(res->proto) == 1) ? __builtin_strcmp (res->proto, "ip") : (- (__extension__
({ const unsigned char *__s2 = (const unsigned char *) (const char *)
(res->proto); int __result = (((const unsigned char *) (const char *)
("ip"))[0] - __s2[0]); if (__s2_len > 0 && __result == 0) { __result = (((const
unsigned char *) (const char *) ("ip"))[1] - __s2[1]); if (__s2_len > 1 &&
__result == 0) { __result = (((const unsigned char *) (const char *) ("ip"))[2]
- __s2[2]); if (__s2_len > 2 && __result == 0) __result = (((const unsigned
char *) (const char *) ("ip"))[3] - __s2[3]); } } __result; })))) :
__builtin_strcmp (res->proto, "ip")))); })) {
Here is the line of code for that one:
if (!strcmp(res->proto, "ip")) {
The ?Wno-parenthese-equality problem gives the output here:
/work/home/rkwiles/projects/intel/dpdk/lib/librte_cmdline/cmdline_cirbuf.c:288:19:
error: equality comparison with extraneous parentheses
[-Werror,-Wparentheses-equality]
if (((cbuf)->len == 0)) {
The line is:
if (CIRBUF_IS_EMPTY(cbuf)) {
This one is in cmdline_cirbuf.h, which can be changed, but I do not think we
need to remove the parenthese.
I will look at some of other solution, so I rejected the patch.
>
>/Bruce
>
