From: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[ Upstream commit f1a58f61d88642ae1e6e97e9d72d73bc70a93cb8 ]
Clang on higher optimization levels detects that NULL is passed to
printf("%s") and warns about it.
While printf() from nolibc gracefully handles that NULL,
it is undefined behavior as per POSIX, so the warning is reasonable.
Avoid the warning by transforming NULL into a non-NULL placeholder.
Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Willy Tarreau <w@xxxxxx>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240807-nolibc-llvm-v2-8-c20f2f5fc7c2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c
index 1fc4998f06bf6..4aaafbfc2f973 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c
@@ -522,7 +522,7 @@ int expect_strzr(const char *expr, int llen)
{
int ret = 0;
- llen += printf(" = <%s> ", expr);
+ llen += printf(" = <%s> ", expr ? expr : "(null)");
if (expr) {
ret = 1;
result(llen, FAIL);
@@ -541,7 +541,7 @@ int expect_strnz(const char *expr, int llen)
{
int ret = 0;
- llen += printf(" = <%s> ", expr);
+ llen += printf(" = <%s> ", expr ? expr : "(null)");
if (!expr) {
ret = 1;
result(llen, FAIL);
--
2.43.0
