On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 08:49:35PM +0200, Rikard Falkeborn wrote: > Hello, > > A new attempt to try to add build time validity checks of GENMASK (and > GENMASK_ULL) inputs. There main differences from v2: > > Remove a define of BUILD_BUG_ON in x86/boot to avoid a compiler warning > about redefining BUILD_BUG_ON. Instead, use the common one from > include/. > > Drop patch 2 in v2 where GENMASK arguments where made more verbose. > > Add a cast in the BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO macro change the type to int to > avoid the somewhat clumpsy casts of BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO. The second patch > in this series adds such a cast to BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO, which makes it > possible to avoid casts when using BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO in patch 3. > > I have checked all users of BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO and I did not find a case > where adding a cast to int would affect existing users but I'd feel much > more comfortable if someone else double (or tripple) checked (there are > ~80 instances plus ~10 copies in tools). Perhaps I should have CC:d > maintainers of files using BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO? > > Finally, use __builtin_constant_p instead of __is_constexpr. This avoids > pulling in kernel.h in bits.h. > > Joe Perches sent a patch series to fix existing misuses, currently there > are five such misuses (which patches pending) left in Linus tree and two > (with patches pending) in linux-next. Those patches should fix all > "simple" misuses of GENMASK (cases where the arguments are numerical > constants). Pushing v2 to linux-next also revealed an arm-specific > misuse where GENMASK was used in another macro (and also broke the > arm-builds). There is a patch to fix that by Nathan Chancellor (not in > linux-next yet). Those patches should be merged before the last patch of > this series to avoid breaking builds. >
Ping. The current status is that patch 1 has been merged into Linus tree through the x86 tree. The patches mentioned about actually fixing the existing misuses have all been merged except two of Joe Perches patches [0], [1], but those patches fixes misuse in unused macros, and will not affect anyones build. I have testbuilt the two remaining patches rebased on top of Linus tree and on linux-next for aarch64 and x86 without seeing any problems (when v2 of the series went into linux-next, those were the only archs where any problems were spotted (build warning on x86, build error on aarch64)). [0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cddd7ad7e9f81dec1e86c106f04229d21fc21920.1562734889.git....@perches.com/ [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/d149d2851f9aa2425c927cb8e311e20c4b83e186.1562734889.git....@perches.com/ Rikard