Re: [PATCH v2 0/1] x86/boot: save fields explicitly, zero out everything else

2019-08-05 Thread John Hubbard 
On 7/30/19 10:46 PM, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: John Hubbard 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> This uses the "save each field explicitly" approach that we discussed
> during the first review [1]. As in [1], this is motivated by a desire
> to clear the compiler warnings when building with gcc 9.
> 
> This is difficult to properly test. I've done a basic boot test, but
> if there are actually errors in which items get zeroed or not, I don't
> have a good test to uncover that.


Also, if anyone has advice about any extra testing I could run on this,
please send it my way.

thanks,
-- 
John Hubbard
NVIDIA

> 
> [1] 
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/alpine.deb.2.21.1907260036500.1...@nanos.tec.linutronix.de
> 
> John Hubbard (1):
>   x86/boot: save fields explicitly, zero out everything else
> 
>  arch/x86/include/asm/bootparam_utils.h | 62 +++---
>  1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>

[PATCH v2 0/1] x86/boot: save fields explicitly, zero out everything else

2019-07-30 Thread john . hubbard 
From: John Hubbard 

Hi,

This uses the "save each field explicitly" approach that we discussed
during the first review [1]. As in [1], this is motivated by a desire
to clear the compiler warnings when building with gcc 9.

This is difficult to properly test. I've done a basic boot test, but
if there are actually errors in which items get zeroed or not, I don't
have a good test to uncover that.

[1] 
https://lore.kernel.org/r/alpine.deb.2.21.1907260036500.1...@nanos.tec.linutronix.de

John Hubbard (1):
  x86/boot: save fields explicitly, zero out everything else

 arch/x86/include/asm/bootparam_utils.h | 62 +++---
 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

-- 
2.22.0