On Fri, 2019-07-19 at 17:47 -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
> On Thu, 2019-07-18 at 16:29 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Qian Cai <cai@xxxxxx>
> > Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 19:26:47 -0400
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Jul 18, 2019, at 5:21 PM, Bill Wendling <morbo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [My previous response was marked as spam...]
> > > >
> > > > Top-of-tree clang says that it's const:
> > > >
> > > > $ gcc a.c -O2 && ./a.out
> > > > a is a const.
> > > >
> > > > $ clang a.c -O2 && ./a.out
> > > > a is a const.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I used clang-7.0.1. So, this is getting worse where both GCC and clang
> > > will
> >
> > start to suffer the
> > > same problem.
> >
> > Then rewrite the module parameter macros such that the non-constness
> > is evident to all compilers regardless of version.
> >
> > That is the place to fix this, otherwise we will just be adding hacks
> > all over the place rather than in just one spot.
>
> The problem is that when the compiler is compiling be_main.o, it has no
> knowledge about what is going to happen in load_module(). The compiler can
> only
> see that a "const struct kernel_param_ops" "__param_ops_rx_frag_size" at the
> time with
>
> __param_ops_rx_frag_size.arg = &rx_frag_size
>
> but only in load_module()->parse_args()->parse_one()->param_set_ushort(), it
> changes "__param_ops_rx_frag_size.arg" which in-turn changes the value
> of "rx_frag_size".
Even for an obvious case, the compilers still go ahead optimizing a variable as
a constant. Maybe it is best to revert the commit d66acc39c7ce ("bitops:
Optimise get_order()") unless some compiler experts could improve the situation.
#include <stdio.h>
int a = 1;
int main(void)
{
int *p;
p = &a;
*p = 2;
if (__builtin_constant_p(a))
printf("a is a const.\n");
printf("a = %d\n", a);
return 0;
}
# gcc -O2 const.c -o const
# ./const
a is a const.
a = 2
