On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 9:21 AM Christophe Leroy
<christophe.le...@c-s.fr> wrote:
>
>
>
> Le 15/02/2019 à 09:11, Mathieu Malaterre a écrit :
> > On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 4:46 PM Mathieu Malaterre <ma...@debian.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> `pt_regs_check` is a dummy function, its purpose is to break the build
> >> if struct pt_regs and struct user_pt_regs don't match.
> >>
> >> This function has no functionnal purpose, and will get eliminated at
> >> link time or after init depending on CONFIG_LD_DEAD_CODE_DATA_ELIMINATION
> >>
> >> This commit adds a prototype to fix warning at W=1:
> >>
> >> arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c:3339:13: error: no previous prototype for
> >> ‘pt_regs_check’ [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
> >>
> >> Suggested-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.le...@c-s.fr>
> >> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Malaterre <ma...@debian.org>
> >> ---
> >> arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c | 4 ++++
> >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c
> >> index a398999d0770..341c0060b4c8 100644
> >> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c
> >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/ptrace.c
> >> @@ -3338,6 +3338,10 @@ void do_syscall_trace_leave(struct pt_regs *regs)
> >> user_enter();
> >> }
> >>
> >> +void __init pt_regs_check(void);
> >> +/* dummy function, its purpose is to break the build if struct pt_regs and
> >> + * struct user_pt_regs don't match.
> >> + */
> >
> > Another trick which seems to work with GCC is:
> >
> > -void __init pt_regs_check(void)
> > +static inline void __init pt_regs_check(void)
>
> Does this really work ? Did you test to ensure that the BUILD_BUG_ON
> still detect mismatch between struct pt_regs and struct user_pt_regs ?
>
My bad, I was unaware of GCC behavior for static inline in this case.
Sorry for the noise.
Original ugly patch does work though.
>
> >
> >> void __init pt_regs_check(void)
> >> {
> >> BUILD_BUG_ON(offsetof(struct pt_regs, gpr) !=
> >> --
> >> 2.19.2
> >>
