On 06/02 10:39:18, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
> On 01.06.2017 22:05, Brian Brooks wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Brian Brooks <brian.bro...@arm.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Ola Liljedahl <ola.liljed...@arm.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagaraha...@arm.com>
> > ---
> > configure.ac | 5 +++++
> > platform/linux-generic/m4/configure.m4 | 4 ++++
> > platform/linux-generic/pktio/ipc.c | 6 ++++--
> > platform/linux-generic/pktio/sysfs.c | 2 +-
> > test/common_plat/validation/api/pktio/pktio.c | 4 +++-
> > 5 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac
> > index 7569ebe0..5eabe4d4 100644
> > --- a/configure.ac
> > +++ b/configure.ac
> > @@ -300,6 +300,11 @@ ODP_CFLAGS="$ODP_CFLAGS -Wmissing-declarations
> > -Wold-style-definition -Wpointer-
> > ODP_CFLAGS="$ODP_CFLAGS -Wcast-align -Wnested-externs -Wcast-qual
> > -Wformat-nonliteral"
> > ODP_CFLAGS="$ODP_CFLAGS -Wformat-security -Wundef -Wwrite-strings"
> > ODP_CFLAGS="$ODP_CFLAGS -std=c99"
> > +
> > +if test "${CC}" == "gcc" -a ${CC_VERSION_MAJOR} -ge 7; then
> > + ODP_CFLAGS="$ODP_CFLAGS -Wimplicit-fallthrough=0"
> > +fi
> > +
>
> Shouldn't Wimplicit-fallthrough=2 be enough? Where are you hitting the
> warning?
Not every fallthrough is commented.
Please read the manual if you would like to know more:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-7.1.0/gcc/Warning-Options.html#Warning-Options
> > # Extra flags for example to suppress certain warning types
> > ODP_CFLAGS="$ODP_CFLAGS $ODP_CFLAGS_EXTRA"
> >
> > diff --git a/platform/linux-generic/m4/configure.m4
> > b/platform/linux-generic/m4/configure.m4
> > index a2a25408..3e2978b5 100644
> > --- a/platform/linux-generic/m4/configure.m4
> > +++ b/platform/linux-generic/m4/configure.m4
> > @@ -28,6 +28,10 @@ AC_LINK_IFELSE(
> > echo "Use newer version. For gcc > 4.7.0"
> > exit -1)
> >
> > +if test "${CC}" == "gcc" -a ${CC_VERSION_MAJOR} -ge 7; then
> > + AM_LDFLAGS="$AM_LDFLAGS -latomic"
> > +fi
> > +
>
> This should be replaced with proper AC_CHECK_LIB or AC_SEARCH_LIBS
I don't think so. The link to libatomic is needed based on the compiler
version, not based on whether a program compiles with -latomic or not
which is AC_CHECK_LIB behavior. If you disagree, please show me how it
can be done.
This is also a very simple (3 line) solution.
> > m4_include([platform/linux-generic/m4/odp_pthread.m4])
> > m4_include([platform/linux-generic/m4/odp_openssl.m4])
> > m4_include([platform/linux-generic/m4/odp_pcap.m4])
> > diff --git a/platform/linux-generic/pktio/ipc.c
> > b/platform/linux-generic/pktio/ipc.c
> > index 06175e5a..29c3a546 100644
> > --- a/platform/linux-generic/pktio/ipc.c
> > +++ b/platform/linux-generic/pktio/ipc.c
> > @@ -694,8 +694,10 @@ static int ipc_close(pktio_entry_t *pktio_entry)
> >
> > if (sscanf(dev, "ipc:%d:%s", &pid, tail) == 2)
> > snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "ipc:%s", tail);
> > - else
> > - snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "%s", dev);
> > + else {
> > + strncpy(name, dev, sizeof(name));
> > + name[sizeof(name) - 1] = '\0';
> > + }
>
> Why?
New -Wformat-truncation=level behavior. Please read the manual if you'd like
to know more.
> >
> > /* unlink this pktio info for both master and slave */
> > odp_shm_free(pktio_entry->s.ipc.pinfo_shm);
>
>
> --
> With best wishes
> Dmitry
