On Mon, Jul 27, 2026 at 12:44:06AM +0400, Marc-André Lureau wrote:
> When compiled with -Og, gcc produces many false-positives
> gcc (GCC) 16.1.1 20260515 (Red Hat 16.1.1-2).

it hurts if you do it? so don't do it then?

> We already use auto-var-init=zero, but better be explicit.

explicit about false positives?

> Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <[email protected]>
> ---
>  target/i386/cpu.c             | 3 ++-
>  target/i386/emulate/x86_mmu.c | 4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/target/i386/cpu.c b/target/i386/cpu.c
> index 5805d33ab92d..28e4435df23f 100644
> --- a/target/i386/cpu.c
> +++ b/target/i386/cpu.c
> @@ -7734,7 +7734,7 @@ static void x86_cpuid_get_avx10_version(Object *obj, 
> Visitor *v,
>  static bool x86_cpu_apply_avx10_features(X86CPU *cpu, uint8_t version,
>                                           Error **errp)
>  {
> -    const AVX10VersionDefinition *def;
> +    const AVX10VersionDefinition *def = NULL;
>      CPUX86State *env = &cpu->env;
>  
>      if (!version) {
> @@ -7757,6 +7757,7 @@ static bool x86_cpu_apply_avx10_features(X86CPU *cpu, 
> uint8_t version,
>              break;
>          }
>      }
> +    assert(def != NULL);
>  
>      if (def->version < version) {
>          error_setg(errp, "avx10-version can be at most %d", def->version);


what does assert have to do with gcc warnings?

> diff --git a/target/i386/emulate/x86_mmu.c b/target/i386/emulate/x86_mmu.c
> index 8d4371467fd7..65bcccd4751e 100644
> --- a/target/i386/emulate/x86_mmu.c
> +++ b/target/i386/emulate/x86_mmu.c
> @@ -185,8 +185,8 @@ static MMUTranslateResult walk_gpt(CPUState *cpu, 
> target_ulong addr, MMUTranslat
>      int largeness = 0;
>      target_ulong cr3 = x86_read_cr(cpu, 3);
>      uint64_t page_mask = pae ? PAE_PTE_PAGE_MASK : LEGACY_PTE_PAGE_MASK;
> -    MMUTranslateResult res;
> -    
> +    MMUTranslateResult res = MMU_TRANSLATE_PAGE_NOT_MAPPED;
> +


This is not 0 as the commit log implies.



>      memset(pt, 0, sizeof(*pt));
>      top_level = gpt_top_level(cpu, pae);
>  
> 
> -- 
> 2.55.0


Reply via email to