On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 01:47:24PM +0100, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 01/22/2018 01:22 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 12:49:12PM +0100, Martin Kletzander wrote:On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:16:55AM +0100, Ján Tomko wrote:After the latest CPU additions, the build fails with clang: cputest.c:905:1: error: stack frame size of 26136 bytes in function 'mymain' [-Werror,-Wframe-larger-than=] Raise the relaxed limit which is used for tests. --- m4/virt-compile-warnings.m4 | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Pushed as a build breaker fix diff --git a/m4/virt-compile-warnings.m4 b/m4/virt-compile-warnings.m4 index f18a08a8f..b9c974842 100644 --- a/m4/virt-compile-warnings.m4 +++ b/m4/virt-compile-warnings.m4 @@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ AC_DEFUN([LIBVIRT_COMPILE_WARNINGS],[ # but using 1024 bytes sized buffers (mostly for virStrerror) # stops us from going down further gl_WARN_ADD([-Wframe-larger-than=4096], [STRICT_FRAME_LIMIT_CFLAGS]) - gl_WARN_ADD([-Wframe-larger-than=25600], [RELAXED_FRAME_LIMIT_CFLAGS]) + gl_WARN_ADD([-Wframe-larger-than=32768], [RELAXED_FRAME_LIMIT_CFLAGS])Remind me again why don't we do -Wno-frame-larger-than (or something to that effect) for tests? Is it just because "We should fix it at some point"? I can't really recall the reasoning behind that (and if it is still valid) even though I already asked for it.I don't think there's a strong reason, given the way we currently write tests with huge amounts of stack variables. For -Wframe-larger-than to be useful, we'd need to move all the big data blobs to be static, global variables.Or simply use compiler that honours variable lifetime. If a variable is defined only in a block, compiler should be able to just reuse the stack. I mean for the following case: do { int x; } while (0); do { int y; } while (0); I don't see any compelling reason for compiler to reserve two ints on the stack. Or if it does, count it as one when comparing agains -Wframe-larger-than.
We can do that ourselves, even though it's not really great thing to do. Just reset the one struct and reuse it. I added it (and future research) as an idea to GSoC ideas. Let's see if someone rewrites that.
Michal -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
