On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 02:32:41PM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 03:27:25PM +0200, Martin Kletzander wrote:On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 11:20:44AM +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > This fixes an incompatibility with glibc 2.25.90 > > Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrange <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > > Pushed as a broken build fix to get CI back online > After this update the build fails for me with gcc-7.1.0 with the following error: In file included from util/virobject.c:28:0: util/virobject.c: In function 'virClassNew': util/viratomic.h:176:46: error: this condition has identical branches [-Werror=duplicated-branches] (void)(0 ? *(atomic) ^ *(atomic) : 0); \ ^ util/virobject.c:144:20: note: in expansion of macro 'virAtomicIntInc' klass->magic = virAtomicIntInc(&magicCounter); ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Does that mean that gcc does optimize our prefetch trick away (considering I understood what that line is trying to do)? Or should we just turn the warning off for that header file?Yep, "-Wduplicated-branches" appears to be a new warning flag in gcc 7.1 which gnulib turns on. There's a similar hit with mingw ../../src/util/vircommand.c: In function 'virCommandWait': ../../src/util/vircommand.c:2562:51: error: this condition has identical branches [-Werror=duplicated-branches] *exitstatus = cmd->rawStatus ? status : WEXITSTATUS(status); ^ cc1: all warnings being treated as errors because WEXITSTATUS(x) expands to 'x' on Win32. We could use a pragma to turn off selectively, but I'm more inclined to just disable this new warning flag.
Well, I'm not sure how that affects the line where we actually use it
(with the atomic variables) or whether that line is not needed anymore
(if that was a fix for older compilers or something similar). But I
can send a patch for removing that warning. How about the other
warning we get when we turn off the first one? I just found out. I
think that could be turned off as well, either for some particular
places or for the whole build:
util/virtime.c: In function 'virTimeStringThenRaw':
util/virtime.c:215:9: error: '%02d' directive output may be truncated writing between 2 and 11 bytes into a region of size between 5 and 21 [-Werror=format-truncation=]
if (snprintf(buf, VIR_TIME_STRING_BUFLEN,
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"%4d-%02d-%02d %02d:%02d:%02d.%03d+0000",
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
fields.tm_year, fields.tm_mon, fields.tm_mday,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
fields.tm_hour, fields.tm_min, fields.tm_sec,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(int) (when % 1000)) >= VIR_TIME_STRING_BUFLEN) {
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
util/virtime.c:215:9: note: using the range [-2147483648, 2147483647] for directive argument
In file included from /usr/include/stdio.h:936:0,
from ../gnulib/lib/stdio.h:43,
from util/virtime.c:36:
/usr/include/bits/stdio2.h:64:10: note: '__builtin___snprintf_chk' output between 29 and 89 bytes into a destination of size 29
return __builtin___snprintf_chk (__s, __n, __USE_FORTIFY_LEVEL - 1,
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
__bos (__s), __fmt, __va_arg_pack ());
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
