Re: [PATCH v2] i915: fix build error with -Werror

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 19/07/16 08:05, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 11:30:06AM -0400, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
This fixes the following build error with -Werror and gcc 6.1:

drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c:2103:6: error: suggest explicit braces to avoid ambiguous 'else' [-Werror=parentheses]

Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@xxxxxxxx>

This doesn't apply on -next any more ... Is this still an issue on latest
kernels?
-Daniel
---
  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c |    7 ++++---
  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_debugfs.c
@@ -2100,9 +2100,10 @@ static int i915_dump_lrc(struct seq_file
  		return ret;

  	list_for_each_entry(ctx, &dev_priv->context_list, link)
-		if (ctx != dev_priv->kernel_context)
+		if (ctx != dev_priv->kernel_context) {
  			for_each_engine(engine, dev_priv)
  				i915_dump_lrc_obj(m, ctx, engine);
+		}

  	mutex_unlock(&dev->struct_mutex);

That's a curious warning. Ever since

commit 373701b1fc7d7c0013ae4fffd8103615c150751e
drm: fix potential dangling else problems in for_each_ macros
Author: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue Nov 24 21:21:55 2015 +0200
Link: http://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/1448392916-2281-1-git-send-email-jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx

we've avoided leaving a dangling else; the code should expand as

    for ( /* each entry */ )
        if (ctx != dev_priv->kernel_context)
            for ( /* each engine */ )
                if (!intel_engine_initialized(engine))
                    {}
                else
                    i915_dump_lrc_obj(m, ctx, engine);

... so that the (hidden) else is clearly matched with the (hidden) if() generated by the macro expansion. Surely the compiler can't think that an else inside a for-loop could be mistakenly paired with one outside the loop?

Of course we did *have* a proposal for an alternative iterator strategy that didn't expose any if/else at all, but some people didn't like it :L

Oh well, it just shows that using macros to rewrite C syntax is still an abomination, Stephen Bourne notwithstanding. If you want iterators and blocks, use Ruby ;)

.Dave.
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx




[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux