On Fri, 16 Feb 2018 23:40:22 +0100 Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> wrote:
> ((CAPI_MSG *) msg)->info.facility_req.structs[1] = > LI_REQ_SILENT_UPDATE & 0xff; > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > drivers/isdn/hardware/eicon/message.c:11163:54: error: array subscript > is above array bounds [-Werror=array-bounds] > ((CAPI_MSG *) msg)->info.facility_req.structs[2] = > LI_REQ_SILENT_UPDATE >> 8; > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > drivers/isdn/hardware/eicon/message.c:11164:54: error: array subscript > is above array bounds [-Werror=array-bounds] > ((CAPI_MSG *) msg)->info.facility_req.structs[3] = 0; > > All those are nonsense AFAICT, and we see them only because the "if()" > override > ends up confusing gcc's value-range tracking in the same way it used to cause > lots of -Wmaybe-uninitialized warnings (which we just disable these days > with PROFILE_ALL_BRANCHES). I'm fine with your patch then. -- Steve
