From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>
Cc: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>,
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>,
git@vger.kernel.org, Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanwen@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] test-tool genzeros: initialize "zeros" to avoid SunCC warning
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2022 09:38:44 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqee5bk02j.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <220113.8635lsvsw6.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> ("Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason"'s message of "Thu, 13 Jan 2022 11:08:44 +0100")
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 12 2022, Taylor Blau wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 03:21:46PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>>> > diff --git a/t/helper/test-genzeros.c b/t/helper/test-genzeros.c
>>> > index 8ca988d6216..5dc89eda0cb 100644
>>> > --- a/t/helper/test-genzeros.c
>>> > +++ b/t/helper/test-genzeros.c
>>> > @@ -3,8 +3,7 @@
>>> >
>>> > int cmd__genzeros(int argc, const char **argv)
>>> > {
>>> > - /* static, so that it is NUL-initialized */
>>> > - static const char zeros[256 * 1024];
>>> > + const char zeros[256 * 1024] = { 0 };
>>>
>>> This diff does two things: add an initializer, and turn the variable into
>>> a `static`. The former is the actual fix that is required. The latter is
>>> not. During the -rc phase, we do not want to see any of the latter. It is
>>> unnecessarily controversial and distracting, and can easily be postponed
>>> until January 25th, 2022.
>>
>> This assumes that making the declaration non-static isn't necessary to
>> fix the warning from SunCC.
>
> Just adding "= { 0 }" and retaining the "static" would FWIW make SunCC
> happy here.
It would make folks, who worry about having too large an item on the
stack to begin with, happy, too. 256kB on stack of a function that
does not make a call into a deep call chain would not matter all
that much, but it is a good principle to keep in mind.
We've worked around false "uninitialized" alarms from too picky
(versions of) compilers before by adding an otherwise unnecessary
initializers before, and I think this falls into the same category.
It is a separate matter if it is appropriate to worry about SunCC
this late in the cycle. If this were "we were clean before, and
these small number of places add breakages", I would say yes.
But if this is "let's not add more of the same existing breakage
that we already have tons", we should not even be discussing about
such a change this late in the cycle (immediately after the new
offenders were added would have been more appropriate).
I offhand do not know which side of that line this one falls,
though.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-13 17:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-11 16:40 [PATCH 0/3] Fix SunCC compiler complaints new in v2.35.0-rc0 Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-01-11 16:40 ` [PATCH 1/3] test-tool genzeros: initialize "zeros" to avoid SunCC warning Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-01-11 19:06 ` Taylor Blau
2022-01-12 14:21 ` Johannes Schindelin
2022-01-12 19:10 ` Taylor Blau
2022-01-13 10:08 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-01-13 15:31 ` Johannes Schindelin
2022-01-13 17:38 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2022-01-11 16:40 ` [PATCH 2/3] reftable: remove unreachable "return" statements Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-01-11 19:16 ` Taylor Blau
2022-01-12 12:47 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-01-12 19:19 ` Taylor Blau
2022-01-13 10:29 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-01-13 15:39 ` Johannes Schindelin
2022-01-13 20:17 ` Johannes Sixt
2022-01-13 21:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-01-11 16:40 ` [PATCH 3/3] reftable tests: avoid "int" overflow, use "uint64_t" Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-01-11 19:28 ` Taylor Blau
2022-01-11 19:31 ` Han-Wen Nienhuys
2022-01-11 19:41 ` Taylor Blau
2022-01-11 20:08 ` Johannes Sixt
2022-01-11 20:18 ` Taylor Blau
2022-01-11 20:21 ` Johannes Sixt
2022-01-11 20:24 ` Taylor Blau
2022-01-12 14:18 ` Johannes Schindelin
2022-01-12 19:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-01-12 19:07 ` Taylor Blau
2022-01-13 10:04 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-01-13 21:38 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-01-11 17:06 ` [PATCH 0/3] Fix SunCC compiler complaints new in v2.35.0-rc0 Han-Wen Nienhuys
2022-01-11 18:36 ` René Scharfe
2022-01-12 1:22 ` Emily Shaffer
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
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqee5bk02j.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=hanwen@google.com \
--cc=me@ttaylorr.com \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
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 read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).