On 23/01/17 18:00, Andreas Tobler wrote:
> On 23.01.17 18:48, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 06:42:15PM +0100, Andreas Tobler wrote:
>>> Something like below?
>>>
>>> If ok, I can commit, right?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Andreas
>>>
>>> 2017-01-23 Andreas Tobler <andre...@gcc.gnu.org>
>>>
>>> * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_elf_asm_constructor): Increase
>>> size of buf.
>>> (aarch64_elf_asm_destructor): Likewise.
>>> --- config/aarch64/aarch64.c (revision 244819)
>>> +++ config/aarch64/aarch64.c (working copy)
>>> @@ -5787,7 +5787,11 @@
>>> else
>>> {
>>> section *s;
>>> - char buf[18];
>>> + /* The size of the buf must be big enough to hold the string
>>> and the
>>> + full integer size of priority. Otherwise we will get a warning
>>> + about format-truncation.
>>> + */
>>
>> Please put the */ on the same line as about format-truncation, like:
>> about format-truncation. */
>> After . there should be 2 spaces rather than one.
>> Also, the comment doesn't tell the truth, the buffer doesn't have to
>> be that
>> big, because we know priority is bounded, just the compiler doesn't know
>> that. So perhaps:
>> /* While priority is known to be in range [0, 65535], so 18 bytes
>> would be enough, the compiler might not know that. To avoid
>> -Wformat-truncation false positive, use a larger size. */
>> char buf[23];
>> or so?
>
>
> Danke.
>
> Andreas
>
> 2017-01-23 Andreas Tobler <andre...@gcc.gnu.org>
>
> * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_elf_asm_constructor): Increase
> size of buf.
> (aarch64_elf_asm_destructor): Likewise.
>
OK.
