[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 5/5] s390x/tcg: fix format-truncation warning

From: Thomas Huth
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] s390x/tcg: fix format-truncation warning
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2022 16:44:49 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.6.0

On 28/03/2022 12.22, Marc-André Lureau wrote:

On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 12:59 PM Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> wrote:

On 28/03/2022 10.47, marcandre.lureau@redhat.com wrote:
From: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>

../target/s390x/tcg/translate.c: In function ‘s390x_translate_init’:
../target/s390x/tcg/translate.c:224:64: error: ‘%d’ directive output may be 
truncated writing between 1 and 11 bytes into a region of size 3 
    224 |         snprintf(cpu_reg_names[i], sizeof(cpu_reg_names[0]), "r%d", 
        |                                                                ^~

Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
   target/s390x/tcg/translate.c | 4 ++--
   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/target/s390x/tcg/translate.c b/target/s390x/tcg/translate.c
index 5acfc0ff9b4e..a082342a0424 100644
--- a/target/s390x/tcg/translate.c
+++ b/target/s390x/tcg/translate.c
@@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ static TCGv_i64 regs[16];

   void s390x_translate_init(void)
-    int i;
+    size_t i;

       psw_addr = tcg_global_mem_new_i64(cpu_env,
                                         offsetof(CPUS390XState, psw.addr),
@@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ void s390x_translate_init(void)

       for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) {
-        snprintf(cpu_reg_names[i], sizeof(cpu_reg_names[0]), "r%d", i);
+        snprintf(cpu_reg_names[i], sizeof(cpu_reg_names[0]), "r%zu", i);

The compiler is *really* too stupid to see that i is in the range between 0
and 16 here??? ... that rather sounds like a compiler bug to me than
something that we should work-around in the QEMU source code. Considering
that you're using a x.0 release of GCC, please file a bug against GCC
instead. If they refuse to fix it for GCC 12.1 or later, we can revisit this
patch, but currently, I really think this should be fixed in GCC instead.

I opened: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105080

Thanks! Looks like it will be fixed in the final release of GCC 12, so I think we can definitely drop this QEMU patch here.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]