From: "SZEDER Gábor" <szeder.dev@gmail•com>
To: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks•im>
Cc: Todd Zullinger <tmz@pobox•com>,
John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaubitz@physik•fu-berlin.de>,
git <git@vger•kernel.org>,
Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@github•com>
Subject: Re: Testsuite failure on s390x and sparc64 after 6840fe9ee2
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2025 20:17:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z+rcVY7KqEuF1wFw@szeder.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z-qKGqpbdaW9WCrP@pks.im>
On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 02:27:06PM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> One thing I stumbled over: the `--min-batch-size` parameter is parsed
> using `OPT_INTEGER()`, which expects the value pointer to point to an
> integer. But we pass `struct backfill_context::min_batch_size`, which is
> of type `size_t`. Maybe that's causing us to end up with an invalid
> value?
We could teach parse-options to verify at compile time that it got a
'value' pointer to an appropriately sized variable with a simple
trick:
diff --git a/parse-options.h b/parse-options.h
index 997ffbee80..ac63f9548a 100644
--- a/parse-options.h
+++ b/parse-options.h
@@ -213,7 +213,7 @@ struct option {
.type = OPTION_INTEGER, \
.short_name = (s), \
.long_name = (l), \
- .value = (v), \
+ .value = (v) + 0/(sizeof(*(v)) == sizeof(int)), \
.argh = N_("n"), \
.help = (h), \
.flags = (f), \
This bug would then cause a compiler error like this:
CC builtin/backfill.o
In file included from builtin/backfill.c:7:
builtin/backfill.c: In function ‘cmd_backfill’:
./parse-options.h:216:25: error: division by zero [-Werror=div-by-zero]
216 | .value = (v) + 0/(sizeof(*v) == sizeof(int)), \
| ^
./parse-options.h:272:37: note: in expansion of macro ‘OPT_INTEGER_F’
272 | #define OPT_INTEGER(s, l, v, h) OPT_INTEGER_F(s, l, v, h, 0)
| ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
builtin/backfill.c:126:17: note: in expansion of macro ‘OPT_INTEGER’
126 | OPT_INTEGER(0, "min-batch-size", &ctx.min_batch_size,
| ^~~~~~~~~~~
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
make: *** [Makefile:2811: builtin/backfill.o] Error 1
Alas, the change is ugly (and we should do the same for many other
OPT_* macros as well) and the error message is far from
to-the-point... Turning this into something usable would require a
more clever trick, and that's more than I can devote to this issue.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-31 18:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-26 20:42 Testsuite failure on s390x and sparc64 after 6840fe9ee2 John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2025-03-26 22:27 ` Todd Zullinger
2025-03-28 9:29 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-03-28 9:30 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-03-28 9:38 ` John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
2025-03-28 14:08 ` Todd Zullinger
2025-03-28 15:37 ` Todd Zullinger
2025-03-31 12:27 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-03-31 15:48 ` Todd Zullinger
2025-03-31 18:17 ` SZEDER Gábor [this message]
2025-04-01 2:33 ` Jeff King
2025-04-01 3:10 ` Jeff King
2025-04-01 11:43 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-04-01 15:04 ` Patrick Steinhardt
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
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Z+rcVY7KqEuF1wFw@szeder.dev \
--to=szeder.dev@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=derrickstolee@github$(echo .)com \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=glaubitz@physik$(echo .)fu-berlin.de \
--cc=ps@pks$(echo .)im \
--cc=tmz@pobox$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox