Hi Drew,
On 05/12/2024 09:04, Andrew Jones wrote:
On Wed, Dec 04, 2024 at 06:57:10PM -0800, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
When compiling the pointer masking tests with -Wall this warning is present:
pointer_masking.c: In function ‘test_tagged_addr_abi_sysctl’: pointer_masking.c:203:9: warning: ignoring return value of ‘pwrite’ declared with attribute ‘warn_unused_result’ [-Wunused-result] 203 | pwrite(fd, &value, 1, 0); | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ pointer_masking.c:208:9: warning: ignoring return value of ‘pwrite’ declared with attribute ‘warn_unused_result’ [-Wunused-result] 208 | pwrite(fd, &value, 1, 0);
I came across this on riscv64-linux-gnu-gcc (Ubuntu 11.4.0-1ubuntu1~22.04).
Fix this by checking that the number of bytes written equal the expected number of bytes written.
Fixes: 7470b5afd150 ("riscv: selftests: Add a pointer masking test") Signed-off-by: Charlie Jenkins charlie@rivosinc.com
Changes in v2:
- I had ret != 2 for testing, I changed it to be ret != 1.
- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241204-fix_warnings_pointer_masking_tests-v1-1-e...
tools/testing/selftests/riscv/abi/pointer_masking.c | 19 +++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/riscv/abi/pointer_masking.c b/tools/testing/selftests/riscv/abi/pointer_masking.c index dee41b7ee3e3..229d85ccff50 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/riscv/abi/pointer_masking.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/riscv/abi/pointer_masking.c @@ -189,6 +189,7 @@ static void test_tagged_addr_abi_sysctl(void) { char value; int fd;
- int ret;
ksft_print_msg("Testing tagged address ABI sysctl\n"); @@ -200,14 +201,24 @@ static void test_tagged_addr_abi_sysctl(void) } value = '1';
- pwrite(fd, &value, 1, 0);
- ret = pwrite(fd, &value, 1, 0);
- if (ret != 1) {
ksft_test_result_fail("Write to /proc/sys/abi/tagged_addr_disabled failed.\n");return;- }
- ksft_test_result(set_tagged_addr_ctrl(min_pmlen, true) == -EINVAL, "sysctl disabled\n");
value = '0';
- pwrite(fd, &value, 1, 0);
- ksft_test_result(set_tagged_addr_ctrl(min_pmlen, true) == 0,
"sysctl enabled\n");
- ret = pwrite(fd, &value, 1, 0);
- if (ret != 1) {
ksft_test_result_fail("Write to /proc/sys/abi/tagged_addr_disabled failed.\n");return;- }
Could make a wrapper function for pwrite() to avoid duplicating the ret value check.
- ksft_test_result(set_tagged_addr_ctrl(min_pmlen, true) == -EINVAL,
"sysctl disabled\n");Why is this changed from expecting 0 for the return and being the "sysctrl enabled" test? We still write '0' to tagged_addr_disabled here.
set_tagged_addr_ctrl(0, false);
base-commit: 40384c840ea1944d7c5a392e8975ed088ecf0b37 change-id: 20241204-fix_warnings_pointer_masking_tests-3860e4f35429 --
- Charlie
Not part of this patch, but now that I looked at test_tagged_addr_abi_sysctl() I see that ksft_test_result_skip() is duplicated.
Thanks, drew
Your mails often end up in my junk folder, am I the only one? Any idea what could be wrong?
Thanks,
Alex
linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv