URL: https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/140 Title: #140: gcc7 related fixes
lslebodn commented: """ On (31/01/17 04:06), fidencio wrote:
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 10:29 AM, lslebodn notifications@github.com wrote:
On (30/01/17 23:52), fidencio wrote:
fidencio requested changes on this pull request.
Neither the short log or the log are consistent between the patches. Please, let's try to follow the git-commit-template.
Also, there are some questions in two of the patches, which are basically curiosity.
Could you be more specific? There is just missing ticket in messages. Because ther is not a ticket.
- sssctl: Fix warning may be used uninitialized:
Component should be in capital letters according to the git-commit-template
git log says something different sh$ git log --oneline | grep " SSSCTL:" | wc -l 1 sh$ git log --oneline | grep " sssctl:" | wc -l 26
And I cannot see a reason to change it. sssctl looks better in lowercase. becaus eutility is sssctl and not SSSCTL
- pam_sss: Suppress warning format-truncation
Same comment
the same here.
- Suppres implicit-fallthrough from gcc 7
Some kind of comments are recognized by gcc 7 but they are ignored with -Wimplicit-fallthrough=5 and only attributes disable the warning.
Please, don't break the lines with 52 characters. Do it on 72 as recommended. I know the recommendation is "do not exceed 72 (...)" and you don't exceed. But we're not going to take this path as someone may write a commit message with a word per-line just because it doesn't exceed the 72 characters :-)
If it is the only problem then I can change it before pushing patches :-)
@@ -434,8 +434,8 @@ static errno_t sssctl_fetch_object(TALLOC_CTX *mem_ctx,
struct sss_domain_info **_dom) { TALLOC_CTX *tmp_ctx;
- struct sysdb_attrs *entry;
- struct sss_domain_info *dom;
- struct sysdb_attrs *entry = NULL;
- struct sss_domain_info *dom = NULL;
I'm curious why just this code path triggered the issue. We have similar code in a lot of other places (even in the same file).
Could you be more specific? Because sssctl_find_object is called just once and there is something smelly (hyper optimized) there.
Let me try to re-phrase. Is there any other part of the code where we can be bite by the very same issue?
In a lot of places we don't initialize the output vars and may be the case we end up hitting this very same "smelly hyper optimization" as well.
I cannot see any other warning related to uninitialized data. Does it answer your question?
LS
"""
See the full comment at https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/140#issuecomment-276361908