From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jastrzebski, MichalX K" Subject: Re: error: value computed is not used Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 17:03:18 +0000 Message-ID: <60ABE07DBB3A454EB7FAD707B4BB1582138C0E5C@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <533710CFB86FA344BFBF2D6802E60286C9D989@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> <3427289.cFFhb9tNHS@xps13> <4008093.EPhAooubXd@xps13> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org" To: Thomas Monjalon , "Wodkowski, PawelX" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4008093.EPhAooubXd@xps13> Content-Language: en-US List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon > Sent: Monday, December 15, 2014 3:17 PM > To: Wodkowski, PawelX > Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] error: value computed is not used >=20 > 2014-12-15 13:47, Wodkowski, PawelX: > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org] > > > 2014-12-15 11:27, Wodkowski, PawelX: > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org] > > > > > 2014-12-08 15:26, Wodkowski, PawelX: > > > > > > From: Qiu, Michael > > > > > > > On 2014/12/8 19:00, Wodkowski, PawelX wrote: > > > > > > > >> lib/librte_pmd_enic/enic_main.c: In function 'enic_set_rss= key': > > > > > > > >> lib/librte_pmd_enic/enic_main.c:862:2: error: value comput= ed is > not > > > used > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> I dig out that, it was ome issue of the macros rte_memcpy= () > > > > > > > >> #define rte_memcpy(dst, src, n) \ > > > > > > > >> ((__builtin_constant_p(n)) ? \ > > > > > > > >> memcpy((dst), (src), (n)) : \ > > > > > > > >> rte_memcpy_func((dst), (src), (n))) > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> When I use only (n) instead of (__builtin_constant_p(n), i= t will > pass( I > > > > > > > >> know that it was incorrect, just a experiment). > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> But I try to use inline function instead of macros: > > > > > > > >> static inline void * rte_memcpy(void *dst, const void *src= , size_t > n) > > > > > > > >> { > > > > > > > >> return __builtin_constant_p(n) ? memcpy(dst, src, = n) : > > > > > > > >> rte_memcpy_func(d= st, src, n); > > > > > > > >> } > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> It will pass:), and works, this could be one potential wor= karound > fix. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Who knows why? The root cause is what? > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> I've no idea about this. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > I got the same issue while ago. I don't remember exactly > everything > > > > > > > > but my conclusion was that there was some bug in compiler. = I > think, > > > > > > > > when 'n' I constant and/or small compiler is inlining memcp= y and > > > throwing > > > > > > > > everything else (including returned value). In that case er= ror is not > > > > > > > > produced (I think this is a bug in compiler). In other case= it is > computing > > > > > > > > some value calling memcpy or rte_ memcpy and you should at > least > > > > > > > > explicitly throw it away by casting to void. I like solutio= n with static > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually, I try to pass "n" as a Int value like 4, it still r= eport this > > > > > > > error :) > > > > > > > > > > > > My workaround was: > > > > > > (void) rte_memcpy(...); > > > > > > > > > > > > But this is only a workaround. > > > > > > > > > > It's not so bad. > > > > > > > > > > > > > inline but someone else should spoke about possible side ef= fects. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, but as I know inline is better than macros. > > > > > > > > > > From the GCC manual: > > > > > " > > > > > You may use this built-in function in either a macro or an inline > function. > > > > > However, if you use it in an inlined function and pass an argumen= t of > the > > > > > function as the argument to the built-in, GCC never returns 1 whe= n you > call > > > > > the inline function with a string constant or compound literal an= d does > not > > > > > return 1 when you pass a constant numeric value to the inline fun= ction > unless > > > > > you specify the -O option. > > > > > " > > > > > > > > > > It seems the "inline fix" cannot be used. > > > > > > > > > > I'm going to send a patch with Pawel's workaround. > > > > > > > > And something like this? > > > > > > > > #define rte_memcpy(dst, src, n) \ > > > > - ((__builtin_constant_p(n)) ? \ > > > > + ({ (__builtin_constant_p(n)) ? \ > > > > memcpy((dst), (src), (n)) : \ > > > > - rte_memcpy_func((dst), (src), (n))) > > > > + rte_memcpy_func((dst), (src), (n)); }) > > > > > > What happens to the returned value after this change? > > > ptr =3D rte_memcpy(dst, src, n) + offset: > > > > > https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Statement-Exprs.html#Statement-Exprs > > > > Whole expression should be 'void *' type (like *memcpy()) and it should > work > > as usual (see maxint() example in above link). It is GCC extension. >=20 > OK nice. > I didn't test it on SUSE 11 SP3. I assume you did it? > Please Pawel, could you send a proper patch quickly? > If nobody disagree, it'll be merged in RC5 today. Hi Thomas, I sent this patch on behalf of Pawel. It is: [PATCH] fix rte_memcpy() macro: avoid unused value warning Michal >=20 > > > > Thomas, can you check build with EXTRA_CFLAG=3D'-Wunused-value'. > > > > > > You mean EXTRA_CFLAGS (with a S). > > > It fails in many locations. > > > What's your point? > > > > I am just asking if this is an typo, error or intend to do statements w= ith no > effects like bellow. > > > > ixgbe_common.c:4429:3: error: statement with no effect [-Werror=3Dunuse= d- > value] > > > > 4426: /* first pull in the header so we know the buffer length */ > > 4427: for (bi =3D 0; bi < dword_len; bi++) { > > 4428: buffer[bi] =3D IXGBE_READ_REG_ARRAY(hw, IXGBE_FLEX_MNG, > bi); > > 4429: IXGBE_LE32_TO_CPUS(&buffer[bi]); // <------ here > > 4430 } >=20 > It's an intent. On big endian CPU, this has an effect. >=20 > > > Do you to support -Wunused-value? > > > > No, I just turned this on to check above change and was surprised what > happened. >=20 > Honestly, I don't know if there is a good fix for this warning. >=20 > -- > Thomas