linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: "Koenig, Christian" <Christian.Koenig@amd.com>,
	Peng Hao <peng.hao2@zte.com.cn>,
	"airlied@linux.ie" <airlied@linux.ie>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org" <amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org"
	<dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	"Deucher, Alexander" <Alexander.Deucher@amd.com>,
	Martin Peres <martin.peres@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] amdgpu/gmc : fix compile warning
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 06:08:48 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8081f60d-ef19-14a5-a589-874afc050d94@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181019085308.GY31561@phenom.ffwll.local>

On 10/19/2018 01:53 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 06:13:56PM +0000, Koenig, Christian wrote:
>> Am 08.10.2018 um 19:46 schrieb Guenter Roeck:
>>> On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 05:22:24PM +0000, Koenig, Christian wrote:
>>>> Am 08.10.2018 um 17:57 schrieb Deucher, Alexander:
>>>>>>>> One thing I found missing in the discussion was the reference to the
>>>>>>>> C standard.
>>>>>>>> The C99 standard states in section 6.7.8 (Initialization) clause 19:
>>>>>>>> "... all
>>>>>>>> subobjects that are not initialized explicitly shall be initialized
>>>>>>>> implicitly the same as objects that have static storage duration".
>>>>>>>> Clause 21 makes further reference to partial initialization,
>>>>>>>> suggesting the same. Various online resources, including the gcc
>>>>>>>> documentation, all state the same. I don't find any reference to a
>>>>>>>> partial initialization which would leave members of a structure
>>>>>>>> undefined. It would be interesting for me to understand how and why
>>>>>>>> this does not apply here.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In this context, it is interesting that the other 48 instances of the
>>>>>>>> { { 0 } } initialization in the same driver don't raise similar
>>>>>>>> concerns, nor seemed to have caused any operational problems.
>>>>>>> Feel free to provide patches to replace those with memset().
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not me. As I see it, the problem, if it exists, would be a violation of the C
>>>>>> standard. I don't believe hacking around bad C compilers. I would rather
>>>>>> blacklist such compilers.
>>>> Well then you would need to blacklist basically all gcc variants of the
>>>> last decade or so.
>>>>
>>>> Initializing only known members of structures is a perfectly valid
>>>> optimization and well known issue when you then compare the structure
>>>> with memcpy() or use the bytes for hashing or something similar.
>>>>
>>> Isn't that about padding ? That is a completely different issue.
>>
>> Correct, yes. But that is the reason why I recommend using memset() for
>> zero initialization.
>>
>> See we don't know the inner layout of the structure, could be another
>> structure or an union.
>>
>> If it's a structure everything is fine because if you initialize one
>> structure member all other get their default type (whatever that means),
>> but if it's an union.....
>>
>> Not sure if compilers still react allergic to that, but its the status
>> I've learned the hard way when the C99 standard came out and it still
>> seems like people are working around that so I recommend everybody to
>> stick with memset().
> 
> Went boom:
> 
> https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=108490
> 

What went boom ? This patch wasn't accepted, and I don't immediately see
the correlation of the suggested revert with the rejected patch.

Guenter

> Can we revert?
> 
> Also, can we properly igt this so that intel-gfx-ci could test this before
> it's all fireworks?
> 
> Thanks, Daniel
> 


  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-10-19 13:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-09-14 10:05 Peng Hao
2018-10-04 18:52 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-05  8:14   ` Koenig, Christian
2018-10-05  8:38     ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-08  8:00       ` Christian König
2018-10-08 13:33         ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-08 13:47           ` Koenig, Christian
2018-10-08 14:10             ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-08 15:57               ` Deucher, Alexander
2018-10-08 17:22                 ` Koenig, Christian
2018-10-08 17:46                   ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-08 18:13                     ` Koenig, Christian
2018-10-19  8:53                       ` Daniel Vetter
2018-10-19  8:56                         ` Daniel Vetter
2018-10-19 13:08                         ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2018-10-19 15:30                           ` Alex Deucher
2018-10-08 17:41                 ` Guenter Roeck
2018-10-08 18:24                   ` Deucher, Alexander

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=8081f60d-ef19-14a5-a589-874afc050d94@roeck-us.net \
    --to=linux@roeck-us.net \
    --cc=Alexander.Deucher@amd.com \
    --cc=Christian.Koenig@amd.com \
    --cc=airlied@linux.ie \
    --cc=amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.peres@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=peng.hao2@zte.com.cn \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH] amdgpu/gmc : fix compile warning' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).