Change specifier to %p to correctly substitute type 'const void *'. A specifer involved with a macro is causing a misleading warning to occur:
In file included from msg_oob.c:14: msg_oob.c: In function ���__recvpair���: ../../kselftest_harness.h:106:40: warning: format ���%s��� expects argument of type ���char *���, but argument 6 has type ���const void *��� [-Wformat=] 106 | fprintf(TH_LOG_STREAM, "# %s:%d:%s:" fmt "\n", \ | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ ../../kselftest_harness.h:101:17: note: in expansion of macro ���__TH_LOG��� 101 | __TH_LOG(fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__); \ | ^~~~~~~~ msg_oob.c:235:17: note: in expansion of macro ���TH_LOG��� 235 | TH_LOG("Expected:%s", expected_errno ? strerror(expected_errno) : expected_buf); | ^~~~~~
A second set of these three warnings occur later for the incorrect specifier at msg_oob.c:256. By tracing the various macros involved, the correct specifier (in msg_oob.c) can be spotted and changed.
Signed-off-by: David Hunter david.hunter.linux@gmail.com --- tools/testing/selftests/net/af_unix/msg_oob.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/af_unix/msg_oob.c b/tools/testing/selftests/net/af_unix/msg_oob.c index 16d0c172eaeb..87090ebda2a7 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/af_unix/msg_oob.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/af_unix/msg_oob.c @@ -232,7 +232,7 @@ static void __recvpair(struct __test_metadata *_metadata,
if (ret[0] != expected_len || recv_errno[0] != expected_errno) { TH_LOG("AF_UNIX :%s", ret[0] < 0 ? strerror(recv_errno[0]) : recv_buf[0]); - TH_LOG("Expected:%s", expected_errno ? strerror(expected_errno) : expected_buf); + TH_LOG("Expected:%p", expected_errno ? strerror(expected_errno) : expected_buf);
ASSERT_EQ(ret[0], expected_len); ASSERT_EQ(recv_errno[0], expected_errno); @@ -256,7 +256,7 @@ static void __recvpair(struct __test_metadata *_metadata, cmp = strncmp(expected_buf, recv_buf[0], expected_len); if (cmp) { TH_LOG("AF_UNIX :%s", ret[0] < 0 ? strerror(recv_errno[0]) : recv_buf[0]); - TH_LOG("Expected:%s", expected_errno ? strerror(expected_errno) : expected_buf); + TH_LOG("Expected:%p", expected_errno ? strerror(expected_errno) : expected_buf);
ASSERT_EQ(cmp, 0); }
From: David Hunter david.hunter.linux@gmail.com Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2024 01:59:57 -0400
Change specifier to %p to correctly substitute type 'const void *'. A specifer involved with a macro is causing a misleading warning to occur:
You may want to run the test before/after the patch.
This is the 3rd patch posted for this warning, so it would be nice to check lore before posting if the patch/issue is simple enough :)
And here's the correct fix. https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240812191122.1092806-1-jain.abhinav177@gmai...
Thanks !
Change declaration to 'char *'. A specifier involved with a macro is causing a misleading warning to occur:
''' In file included from msg_oob.c:14: msg_oob.c: In function ‘__recvpair’: ../../kselftest_harness.h:106:40: warning: format ‘%s’ expects argument of type ‘char *’, but argument 6 has type ‘const void *’ [-Wformat=] 106 | fprintf(TH_LOG_STREAM, "# %s:%d:%s:" fmt "\n", \ | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ ../../kselftest_harness.h:101:17: note: in expansion of macro ‘__TH_LOG’ 101 | __TH_LOG(fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__); \ | ^~~~~~~~ msg_oob.c:235:17: note: in expansion of macro ‘TH_LOG’ 235 | TH_LOG("Expected:%s", expected_errno ? strerror(expected_errno) : expected_buf); | ^~~~~~ '''
I ran the tests using the following command:
''' make kselftest TARGETS=net/af_unix '''
I used a diff to examine the difference in output among the three scenarios (1) before making the change, (2) after changing the specifier, and (3) after changing the declaration. I saw no difference in outputs among any of the tests; all three tests had the same exact output.
For "net/af_unix: msg_oob", all 38 tests passed for msg_oob. I received this result for all 3 scenarios. Should I have gotten a different result?
Signed-off-by: David Hunter david.hunter.linux@gmail.com --- Apologies for not looking ahead of time. I definitely need to remember to check ahead of time. I understand that the other person was first; I just wanted to get some practice sending patches. This is all still new to me.
V1 --> V2 - Changed the declaration instead of the specifier. - Put number of patches for this bug fix. - Put in tests performed.
--- tools/testing/selftests/net/af_unix/msg_oob.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/af_unix/msg_oob.c b/tools/testing/selftests/net/af_unix/msg_oob.c index 16d0c172eaeb..535eb2c3d7d1 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/af_unix/msg_oob.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/af_unix/msg_oob.c @@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ static void __sendpair(struct __test_metadata *_metadata,
static void __recvpair(struct __test_metadata *_metadata, FIXTURE_DATA(msg_oob) *self, - const void *expected_buf, int expected_len, + const char *expected_buf, int expected_len, int buf_len, int flags) { int i, ret[2], recv_errno[2], expected_errno = 0;
From: David Hunter david.hunter.linux@gmail.com Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2024 15:19:32 -0400
Apologies for not looking ahead of time. I definitely need to remember to check ahead of time. I understand that the other person was first; I just wanted to get some practice sending patches. This is all still new to me.
I understand, but let's not respin an unnecessary patch just for practice that waste community time...
linux-kselftest-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
David Hunter -
Kuniyuki Iwashima