diff mbox series

[v2] raw/ioat: fix parameter shadow warning

Message ID 20210510125514.12914-1-kevin.laatz@intel.com (mailing list archive)
State Superseded, archived
Delegated to: Thomas Monjalon
Headers show
Series [v2] raw/ioat: fix parameter shadow warning | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
ci/iol-intel-Performance success Performance Testing PASS
ci/iol-mellanox-Performance success Performance Testing PASS
ci/intel-Testing success Testing PASS
ci/Intel-compilation success Compilation OK
ci/github-robot success github build: passed
ci/iol-abi-testing success Testing PASS
ci/iol-testing success Testing PASS
ci/iol-intel-Functional success Functional Testing PASS
ci/checkpatch success coding style OK

Commit Message

Kevin Laatz May 10, 2021, 12:55 p.m. UTC
In the function __idxd_completed_ops() we have a parameter shadow warning
due to a local variable having the same name as one of the function
parameters. This issue is fixed by simply renaming the local variable.

This warning was discovered during an OVS build with DPDK 21.05-rc2. The
OVS build passes the -Wshadow flag by default, allowing the warning to be
seen.

Fixes: 245efe544d8e ("raw/ioat: report status of completed jobs")

Reported-by: Sunil Pai G <sunil.pai.g@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Kevin Laatz <kevin.laatz@intel.com>
Tested-by: Sunil Pai G <sunil.pai.g@intel.com>

---
v2: add details of warning discovery
---
 drivers/raw/ioat/rte_idxd_rawdev_fns.h | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Comments

Bruce Richardson May 10, 2021, 1:36 p.m. UTC | #1
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 12:55:14PM +0000, Kevin Laatz wrote:
> In the function __idxd_completed_ops() we have a parameter shadow warning
> due to a local variable having the same name as one of the function
> parameters. This issue is fixed by simply renaming the local variable.
> 
> This warning was discovered during an OVS build with DPDK 21.05-rc2. The
> OVS build passes the -Wshadow flag by default, allowing the warning to be
> seen.
> 
> Fixes: 245efe544d8e ("raw/ioat: report status of completed jobs")
> 
> Reported-by: Sunil Pai G <sunil.pai.g@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Kevin Laatz <kevin.laatz@intel.com>
> Tested-by: Sunil Pai G <sunil.pai.g@intel.com>
> 
> ---
Acked-by: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
David Marchand May 10, 2021, 2:06 p.m. UTC | #2
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 2:55 PM Kevin Laatz <kevin.laatz@intel.com> wrote:
>
> In the function __idxd_completed_ops() we have a parameter shadow warning
> due to a local variable having the same name as one of the function
> parameters. This issue is fixed by simply renaming the local variable.
>
> This warning was discovered during an OVS build with DPDK 21.05-rc2. The
> OVS build passes the -Wshadow flag by default, allowing the warning to be
> seen.

A bit confusing.
-Wshadow only affects OVS code and there is no code calling this in
the OVS master branch.

I did not see this issue while updating my dpdk-latest OVS branch and
running builds in GHA.
So I guess Sunil caught it with his patch:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/patch/20201023094845.35652-2-sunil.pai.g@intel.com/
Bruce Richardson May 10, 2021, 2:48 p.m. UTC | #3
On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 04:06:00PM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 2:55 PM Kevin Laatz <kevin.laatz@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > In the function __idxd_completed_ops() we have a parameter shadow warning
> > due to a local variable having the same name as one of the function
> > parameters. This issue is fixed by simply renaming the local variable.
> >
> > This warning was discovered during an OVS build with DPDK 21.05-rc2. The
> > OVS build passes the -Wshadow flag by default, allowing the warning to be
> > seen.
> 
> A bit confusing.
> -Wshadow only affects OVS code and there is no code calling this in
> the OVS master branch.
> 
> I did not see this issue while updating my dpdk-latest OVS branch and
> running builds in GHA.
> So I guess Sunil caught it with his patch:
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/patch/20201023094845.35652-2-sunil.pai.g@intel.com/
>
Yes, it was caught by Sunil in the course of his work.

Ideally, I think -Wshadow would be a good flag to add to our DPDK builds,
but it causes quite a number of errors right now to do so. Hopefully in a
future release.

/Bruce
Thomas Monjalon May 11, 2021, 8:49 p.m. UTC | #4
10/05/2021 16:48, Bruce Richardson:
> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 04:06:00PM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
> > On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 2:55 PM Kevin Laatz <kevin.laatz@intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > In the function __idxd_completed_ops() we have a parameter shadow warning
> > > due to a local variable having the same name as one of the function
> > > parameters. This issue is fixed by simply renaming the local variable.
> > >
> > > This warning was discovered during an OVS build with DPDK 21.05-rc2. The
> > > OVS build passes the -Wshadow flag by default, allowing the warning to be
> > > seen.
> > 
> > A bit confusing.
> > -Wshadow only affects OVS code and there is no code calling this in
> > the OVS master branch.
> > 
> > I did not see this issue while updating my dpdk-latest OVS branch and
> > running builds in GHA.
> > So I guess Sunil caught it with his patch:
> > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/patch/20201023094845.35652-2-sunil.pai.g@intel.com/
> >
> Yes, it was caught by Sunil in the course of his work.

So the commit message should be fixed please.
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/raw/ioat/rte_idxd_rawdev_fns.h b/drivers/raw/ioat/rte_idxd_rawdev_fns.h
index 862e0eb41d..dbd8dfc507 100644
--- a/drivers/raw/ioat/rte_idxd_rawdev_fns.h
+++ b/drivers/raw/ioat/rte_idxd_rawdev_fns.h
@@ -301,11 +301,11 @@  __idxd_completed_ops(int dev_id, uint8_t max_ops, uint32_t *status, uint8_t *num
 		uint16_t idx_to_chk = idxd->batch_idx_ring[idxd->batch_idx_read];
 		volatile struct rte_idxd_completion *comp_to_chk =
 				(struct rte_idxd_completion *)&idxd->desc_ring[idx_to_chk];
-		uint8_t status = comp_to_chk->status;
-		if (status == 0)
+		uint8_t batch_status = comp_to_chk->status;
+		if (batch_status == 0)
 			break;
 		comp_to_chk->status = 0;
-		if (unlikely(status > 1)) {
+		if (unlikely(batch_status > 1)) {
 			/* error occurred somewhere in batch, start where last checked */
 			uint16_t desc_count = comp_to_chk->completed_size;
 			uint16_t batch_start = idxd->hdls_avail;