Re: kfifo must_check warning

From: Andrew Morton
Date: Wed Oct 20 2010 - 01:12:27 EST


On Tue, 19 Oct 2010 15:10:48 -0700 Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> In 2.6.36-rc8, I see this build warning:
>
> drivers/char/n_gsm.c: In function 'gsm_dlci_alloc':
> drivers/char/n_gsm.c:1580: warning: ignoring return value of '__kfifo_must_check_helper', declared with attribute warn_unused_result
>
> The helper seems to be getting in the way (?). The driver code does this:
>
> if (kfifo_alloc(&dlci->_fifo, 4096, GFP_KERNEL) < 0) {
> kfree(dlci);
> return NULL;
> }
>
> Should the driver code be doing something else?
> or should the kfifo_alloc() macro be checking the result of the helper?
>

A gcc bug, I'd say. The code looks OK and my gcc doesn't warn.

Perhaps see if you can find some code transformation in n_gsm.c which
makes it go away? Add a new local variable or something.


I did see a probably unrelated bug in there though.
__kfifo_must_check_helper() coerces its arg into an `unsigned int' and
returns an unsigned int. Consequently if kfifo_alloc() tries to return
-EINVAL, the above-quoted code won't detect the error: it will see
-EINVAL as a large, positive unsigned value.

I don't see a simple fix for that apart from creating several flavours
of __kfifo_must_check_helper() and carefully going through each
instance and using the one which takes (and returns) the correct type.

A suitable temporary 2.6.37 patch would bee to just disable
__kfifo_must_check_helper():

--- a/include/linux/kfifo.h~a
+++ a/include/linux/kfifo.h
@@ -171,11 +171,7 @@ struct kfifo_rec_ptr_2 __STRUCT_KFIFO_PT
}


-static inline unsigned int __must_check
-__kfifo_must_check_helper(unsigned int val)
-{
- return val;
-}
+#define __kfifo_must_check_helper(x) (x)

/**
* kfifo_initialized - Check if the fifo is initialized
_

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/