Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260109112133.973195406@linuxfoundation.org
Tested-by: Brett A C Sheffield <bacs@librecast.net>
Tested-by: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@broadcom.com>
Tested-by: Slade Watkins <sr@sladewatkins.com>
Tested-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Tested-by: Peter Schneider <pschneider1968@googlemail.com>
Tested-by: Ron Economos <re@w6rz.net>
Tested-by: Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com>
Tested-by: Jeffrin Jose T <jeffrin@rajagiritech.edu.in>
Tested-by: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
Tested-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Tested-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
[ Upstream commit ee916dccd4 ]
This pattern isn't very documented, and apparently not used much outside
of 'make tools/help', but it has existed for over a decade (since commit
ea01fa9f63: "tools: Connect to the kernel build system").
However, it doesn't work very well for most cases, particularly the
useful "tools/all" target, because it overrides the LDFLAGS value with
an empty one.
And once overridden, 'make' will then not honor the tooling makefiles
trying to change it - which then makes any LDFLAGS use in the tooling
directory break, typically causing odd link errors.
Remove that LDFLAGS override, since it seems to be entirely historical.
The core kernel makefiles no longer modify LDFLAGS as part of the build,
and use kernel-specific link flags instead (eg 'KBUILD_LDFLAGS' and
friends).
This allows more of the 'make tools/*' cases to work. I say 'more',
because some of the tooling build rules make various other assumptions
or have other issues, so it's still a bit hit-or-miss. But those issues
tend to show up with the 'make -C tools xyz' pattern too, so now it's no
longer an issue of this particular 'tools/*' build rule being special.
Acked-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Cc: Nicolas Schier <nicolas@fjasle.eu>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
commit 936599ca51 upstream.
The userprogs infrastructure does not expect clang being used with GNU ld
and in that case uses /usr/bin/ld for linking, not the configured $(LD).
This fallback is problematic as it will break when cross-compiling.
Mixing clang and GNU ld is used for example when building for SPARC64,
as ld.lld is not sufficient; see Documentation/kbuild/llvm.rst.
Relax the check around --ld-path so it gets used for all linkers.
Fixes: dfc1b168a8 ("kbuild: userprogs: use correct lld when linking through clang")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <thomas.weissschuh@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
commit 4f79eaa2ce upstream.
Clang and GCC have different behaviors around disabling warnings
included in -Wall and -Wextra and the order in which flags are
specified, which is exposed by clang's new support for
-Wunterminated-string-initialization.
$ cat test.c
const char foo[3] = "FOO";
const char bar[3] __attribute__((__nonstring__)) = "BAR";
$ clang -fsyntax-only -Wextra test.c
test.c:1:21: warning: initializer-string for character array is too long, array size is 3 but initializer has size 4 (including the null terminating character); did you mean to use the 'nonstring' attribute? [-Wunterminated-string-initialization]
1 | const char foo[3] = "FOO";
| ^~~~~
$ clang -fsyntax-only -Wextra -Wno-unterminated-string-initialization test.c
$ clang -fsyntax-only -Wno-unterminated-string-initialization -Wextra test.c
test.c:1:21: warning: initializer-string for character array is too long, array size is 3 but initializer has size 4 (including the null terminating character); did you mean to use the 'nonstring' attribute? [-Wunterminated-string-initialization]
1 | const char foo[3] = "FOO";
| ^~~~~
$ gcc -fsyntax-only -Wextra test.c
test.c:1:21: warning: initializer-string for array of ‘char’ truncates NUL terminator but destination lacks ‘nonstring’ attribute (4 chars into 3 available) [-Wunterminated-string-initialization]
1 | const char foo[3] = "FOO";
| ^~~~~
$ gcc -fsyntax-only -Wextra -Wno-unterminated-string-initialization test.c
$ gcc -fsyntax-only -Wno-unterminated-string-initialization -Wextra test.c
Move -Wextra up right below -Wall in Makefile.extrawarn to ensure these
flags are at the beginning of the warning options list. Move the couple
of warning options that have been added to the main Makefile since
commit e88ca24319 ("kbuild: consolidate warning flags in
scripts/Makefile.extrawarn") to scripts/Makefile.extrawarn after -Wall /
-Wextra to ensure they get properly disabled for all compilers.
Fixes: 9d7a0577c9 ("gcc-15: disable '-Wunterminated-string-initialization' entirely for now")
Link: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/10359
Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
commit a79be02bba upstream.
This was triggered by one of my mis-uses causing odd build warnings on
sparc in linux-next, but while figuring out why the "obviously correct"
use of cc-option caused such odd breakage, I found eight other cases of
the same thing in the tree.
The root cause is that 'cc-option' doesn't work for checking negative
warning options (ie things like '-Wno-stringop-overflow') because gcc
will silently accept options it doesn't recognize, and so 'cc-option'
ends up thinking they are perfectly fine.
And it all works, until you have a situation where _another_ warning is
emitted. At that point the compiler will go "Hmm, maybe the user
intended to disable this warning but used that wrong option that I
didn't recognize", and generate a warning for the unrecognized negative
option.
Which explains why we have several cases of this in the tree: the
'cc-option' test really doesn't work for this situation, but most of the
time it simply doesn't matter that ity doesn't work.
The reason my recently added case caused problems on sparc was pointed
out by Thomas Weißschuh: the sparc build had a previous explicit warning
that then triggered the new one.
I think the best fix for this would be to make 'cc-option' a bit smarter
about this sitation, possibly by adding an intentional warning to the
test case that then triggers the unrecognized option warning reliably.
But the short-term fix is to replace 'cc-option' with an existing helper
designed for this exact case: 'cc-disable-warning', which picks the
negative warning but uses the positive form for testing the compiler
support.
Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250422204718.0b4e3f81@canb.auug.org.au/
Explained-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@weissschuh.net>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
commit 9d7a0577c9 upstream.
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
I had left the warning around but as a non-fatal error to get my gcc-15
builds going, but fixed up some of the most annoying warning cases so
that it wouldn't be *too* verbose.
Because I like the _concept_ of the warning, even if I detested the
implementation to shut it up.
It turns out the implementation to shut it up is even more broken than I
thought, and my "shut up most of the warnings" patch just caused fatal
errors on gcc-14 instead.
I had tested with clang, but when I upgrade my development environment,
I try to do it on all machines because I hate having different systems
to maintain, and hadn't realized that gcc-14 now had issues.
The ACPI case is literally why I wanted to have a *type* that doesn't
trigger the warning (see commit d5d45a7f26: "gcc-15: make
'unterminated string initialization' just a warning"), instead of
marking individual places as "__nonstring".
But gcc-14 doesn't like that __nonstring location that shut gcc-15 up,
because it's on an array of char arrays, not on one single array:
drivers/acpi/tables.c:399:1: error: 'nonstring' attribute ignored on objects of type 'const char[][4]' [-Werror=attributes]
399 | static const char table_sigs[][ACPI_NAMESEG_SIZE] __initconst __nonstring = {
| ^~~~~~
and my attempts to nest it properly with a type had failed, because of
how gcc doesn't like marking the types as having attributes, only
symbols.
There may be some trick to it, but I was already annoyed by the bad
attribute design, now I'm just entirely fed up with it.
I wish gcc had a proper way to say "this type is a *byte* array, not a
string".
The obvious thing would be to distinguish between "char []" and an
explicitly signed "unsigned char []" (as opposed to an implicitly
unsigned char, which is typically an architecture-specific default, but
for the kernel is universal thanks to '-funsigned-char').
But any "we can typedef a 8-bit type to not become a string just because
it's an array" model would be fine.
But "__attribute__((nonstring))" is sadly not that sane model.
Reported-by: Chris Clayton <chris2553@googlemail.com>
Fixes: 4b4bd8c50f ("gcc-15: acpi: sprinkle random '__nonstring' crumbles around")
Fixes: d5d45a7f26 ("gcc-15: make 'unterminated string initialization' just a warning")
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
[nathan: drivers/acpi diff dropped due to lack of 4b4bd8c50f in stable]
Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
commit d5d45a7f26 upstream.
gcc-15 enabling -Wunterminated-string-initialization in -Wextra by
default was done with the best intentions, but the warning is still
quite broken.
What annoys me about the warning is that this is a very traditional AND
CORRECT way to initialize fixed byte arrays in C:
unsigned char hex[16] = "0123456789abcdef";
and we use this all over the kernel. And the warning is fine, but gcc
developers apparently never made a reasonable way to disable it. As is
(sadly) tradition with these things.
Yes, there's "__attribute__((nonstring))", and we have a macro to make
that absolutely disgusting syntax more palatable (ie the kernel syntax
for that monstrosity is just "__nonstring").
But that attribute is misdesigned. What you'd typically want to do is
tell the compiler that you are using a type that isn't a string but a
byte array, but that doesn't work at all:
warning: ‘nonstring’ attribute does not apply to types [-Wattributes]
and because of this fundamental mis-design, you then have to mark each
instance of that pattern.
This is particularly noticeable in our ACPI code, because ACPI has this
notion of a 4-byte "type name" that gets used all over, and is exactly
this kind of byte array.
This is a sad oversight, because the warning is useful, but really would
be so much better if gcc had also given a sane way to indicate that we
really just want a byte array type at a type level, not the broken "each
and every array definition" level.
So now instead of creating a nice "ACPI name" type using something like
typedef char acpi_name_t[4] __nonstring;
we have to do things like
char name[ACPI_NAMESEG_SIZE] __nonstring;
in every place that uses this concept and then happens to have the
typical initializers.
This is annoying me mainly because I think the warning _is_ a good
warning, which is why I'm not just turning it off in disgust. But it is
hampered by this bad implementation detail.
[ And obviously I'm doing this now because system upgrades for me are
something that happen in the middle of the release cycle: don't do it
before or during travel, or just before or during the busy merge
window period. ]
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
