On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 12:50 PM Adrian Chadd <adr...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > Author: adrian > Date: Fri Nov 13 18:50:24 2020 > New Revision: 367647 > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/367647 > > Log: > [tests] Fix unused variable warning in gcc > > Reviewed by: markj, imp, cem, > Approved by: markj > Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D26792 > > Modified: > head/tests/sys/vm/page_fault_signal.c > > Modified: head/tests/sys/vm/page_fault_signal.c > ============================================================================== > --- head/tests/sys/vm/page_fault_signal.c Fri Nov 13 18:34:13 2020 > (r367646) > +++ head/tests/sys/vm/page_fault_signal.c Fri Nov 13 18:50:24 2020 > (r367647) > @@ -115,7 +114,7 @@ ATF_TC_BODY(page_fault_signal__segv_accerr_2, tc) > ATF_REQUIRE(p != MAP_FAILED); > if (sigsetjmp(sig_env, 1) == 0) { > setup_signals(); > - dummy = *p; > + (void)*(volatile int *)p; > } > (void)munmap(p, sz); > ATF_CHECK_EQ(SIGSEGV, last_sig);
A minor nit, we could/should probably add an explicit atf_tc_fail() after the access. While it seems unlikely that the compiler might elide it and it would still fail anyways because last_sig would certainly not be SIGSEGV, it'd be good to catch it earlier with an explicit fail. I don't recall how good atf-c's diagnostics are otherwise, if it'd be clear that last_sig == 0 or not without requiring further triage. Thanks, Kyle Evans _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
