On Mon 20-06-22 12:54:56, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > On Mon, 20 Jun 2022, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > On Sat 18-06-22 11:25:43, Charan Teja Kalla wrote: > > > Hello Andrew, > > > > > > On 6/18/2022 4:34 AM, kernel test robot wrote: > > > > tree: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master > > > > head: 4b35035bcf80ddb47c0112c4fbd84a63a2836a18 > > > > commit: 5bd009c7c9a9e888077c07535dc0c70aeab242c3 mm: madvise: return correct bytes advised with process_madvise > > > > date: 3 months ago > > > > compiler: mips-linux-gcc (GCC) 11.3.0 > > > > reproduce (cppcheck warning): > > > > # apt-get install cppcheck > > > > git checkout 5bd009c7c9a9e888077c07535dc0c70aeab242c3 > > > > cppcheck --quiet --enable=style,performance,portability --template=gcc FILE > > > > > > > > If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag where applicable > > > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > > > cppcheck warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>) > > > >>> mm/madvise.c:1438:6: warning: Redundant assignment of 'ret' to itself. [selfAssignment] > > > > ret = (total_len - iov_iter_count(&iter)) ? : ret; > > > > > > Other way to avoid this warning is by creating another local variable > > > that holds the total bytes processed. Having another local variable to > > > get rid off some compilation warning doesn't seem proper to me. So, > > > leaving this warning unless you ask me to fix this. > > > > Is this a new warning? I do not see it supported by my gcc 10.x. Do we > > cppcheck is a static analysis tool. It looks like it doesn't have a > proper understanding of ?: Ohh, thanks for the clarification! I thought this was a gcc feature. Then I would suggest to report a bug report against the static checker rather than making any changes to the kernel to workaround it. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
