These BUILD_BUG_ON()s exist to cover the curious absence of a diagnostic for
code which looks like:
uint32_t foo[1] = { 1, 2, 3 };
However, GCC 12 at least does now warn for this:
foo.c:1:24: error: excess elements in array initializer [-Werror]
884 | uint32_t foo[1] = { 1, 2, 3 };
| ^
foo.c:1:24: note: (near initialization for 'foo')
and has found other array length issues which we want to fix. Drop the cross
check now tools can spot the problem case directly.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com>
---
CC: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger....@citrix.com>
CC: Wei Liu <w...@xen.org>
---
xen/arch/x86/cpu-policy.c | 6 ------
1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu-policy.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu-policy.c
index ef6a2d0d180a..44c88debf958 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu-policy.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu-policy.c
@@ -883,12 +883,6 @@ void __init init_dom0_cpuid_policy(struct domain *d)
static void __init __maybe_unused build_assertions(void)
{
- BUILD_BUG_ON(ARRAY_SIZE(known_features) != FSCAPINTS);
- BUILD_BUG_ON(ARRAY_SIZE(pv_max_featuremask) != FSCAPINTS);
- BUILD_BUG_ON(ARRAY_SIZE(hvm_shadow_max_featuremask) != FSCAPINTS);
- BUILD_BUG_ON(ARRAY_SIZE(hvm_hap_max_featuremask) != FSCAPINTS);
- BUILD_BUG_ON(ARRAY_SIZE(deep_features) != FSCAPINTS);
-
/* Find some more clever allocation scheme if this trips. */
BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(struct cpu_policy) > PAGE_SIZE);
--
2.30.2
