# [PATCH] run-command: fix an 'different modifiers' sparse warning 4 messages from 2016-02-25 to 2016-02-25. Participants: Ramsay Jones, Junio C Hamano, Jeff King. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/41522 ## Ramsay Jones, 2016-02-25 19:35 Subject: [PATCH] run-command: fix an 'different modifiers' sparse warning Message-ID: <56CF576B.4020401@ramsayjones.plus.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/56CF576B.4020401%40ramsayjones.plus.com ``` Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones --- Hi Jeff, If you need to re-roll your 'jk/epipe-in-async' branch, could you please squash this into the relevant patch. (ie. "write_or_die: handle EPIPE in async threads", 24-02-2016). Thanks! ATB, Ramsay Jones run-command.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/run-command.c b/run-command.c index cd861bc..5dec18b 100644 --- a/run-command.c +++ b/run-command.c @@ -625,7 +625,7 @@ int in_async(void) return !pthread_equal(main_thread, pthread_self()); } -void async_exit(int code) +void NORETURN async_exit(int code) { pthread_exit((void *)(intptr_t)code); } @@ -675,7 +675,7 @@ int in_async(void) return process_is_async; } -int async_exit(int code) +int NORETURN async_exit(int code) { exit(code); } -- 2.7.0 ``` ## Junio C Hamano, 2016-02-25 20:20 Subject: Re: [PATCH] run-command: fix an 'different modifiers' sparse warning Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/xmqqfuwgo83n.fsf%40gitster.mtv.corp.google.com In-Reply-To: <56CF576B.4020401@ramsayjones.plus.com> ``` Ramsay Jones writes: > Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones > --- > > Hi Jeff, > > If you need to re-roll your 'jk/epipe-in-async' branch, could you > please squash this into the relevant patch. (ie. "write_or_die: > handle EPIPE in async threads", 24-02-2016). > > Thanks! I actually was planning to merge this to 'next' today, so I'll squash it in without waiting for a reroll. By the way, doesn't it bother anybody to give two different types to the same function depending on NO_PTHREAD? It is not a new issue added by this series, but async_exit() that claims to return int does not (naturally) return anything, and sparse does not seem to care (neither do we). > > ATB, > Ramsay Jones > > run-command.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/run-command.c b/run-command.c > index cd861bc..5dec18b 100644 > --- a/run-command.c > +++ b/run-command.c > @@ -625,7 +625,7 @@ int in_async(void) > return !pthread_equal(main_thread, pthread_self()); > } > > -void async_exit(int code) > +void NORETURN async_exit(int code) > { > pthread_exit((void *)(intptr_t)code); > } > @@ -675,7 +675,7 @@ int in_async(void) > return process_is_async; > } > > -int async_exit(int code) > +int NORETURN async_exit(int code) > { > exit(code); > } ``` ## Jeff King, 2016-02-25 21:39 Subject: Re: [PATCH] run-command: fix an 'different modifiers' sparse warning Message-ID: <20160225213935.GA3612@sigill.intra.peff.net> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20160225213935.GA3612%40sigill.intra.peff.net In-Reply-To: ``` On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:20:12PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ramsay Jones writes: > > > Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones > > --- > > > > Hi Jeff, > > > > If you need to re-roll your 'jk/epipe-in-async' branch, could you > > please squash this into the relevant patch. (ie. "write_or_die: > > handle EPIPE in async threads", 24-02-2016). > > > > Thanks! > > I actually was planning to merge this to 'next' today, so I'll > squash it in without waiting for a reroll. I am OK with that. But I do find it interesting that we must mark NORETURN in both the declaration and the definition, but we don't for __attribute__((format)). > By the way, doesn't it bother anybody to give two different types to > the same function depending on NO_PTHREAD? It is not a new issue > added by this series, but async_exit() that claims to return int > does not (naturally) return anything, and sparse does not seem to > care (neither do we). It would have bothered me if I had noticed. :) It is simply a bug, and sparse (and the compiler) do not notice it because it only shows up if you compile with NO_PTHREADS=1. And I think it is added by this series: > > @@ -675,7 +675,7 @@ int in_async(void) > > return process_is_async; > > } > > > > -int async_exit(int code) > > +int NORETURN async_exit(int code) The return value on this one should be "void", too, of course. -Peff ``` ## Ramsay Jones, 2016-02-25 23:08 Subject: Re: [PATCH] run-command: fix an 'different modifiers' sparse warning Message-ID: <56CF896F.3000601@ramsayjones.plus.com> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/56CF896F.3000601%40ramsayjones.plus.com In-Reply-To: <20160225213935.GA3612@sigill.intra.peff.net> ``` On 25/02/16 21:39, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:20:12PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Ramsay Jones writes: >> >>> Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones >>> --- >>> >>> Hi Jeff, >>> >>> If you need to re-roll your 'jk/epipe-in-async' branch, could you >>> please squash this into the relevant patch. (ie. "write_or_die: >>> handle EPIPE in async threads", 24-02-2016). >>> >>> Thanks! >> >> I actually was planning to merge this to 'next' today, so I'll >> squash it in without waiting for a reroll. > > I am OK with that. But I do find it interesting that we must mark > NORETURN in both the declaration and the definition, but we don't for > __attribute__((format)). > >> By the way, doesn't it bother anybody to give two different types to >> the same function depending on NO_PTHREAD? It is not a new issue >> added by this series, but async_exit() that claims to return int >> does not (naturally) return anything, and sparse does not seem to >> care (neither do we). > > It would have bothered me if I had noticed. :) > > It is simply a bug, and sparse (and the compiler) do not notice it > because it only shows up if you compile with NO_PTHREADS=1. And I think > it is added by this series: Wow, I can't believe that I didn't notice this myself while editing the file! :-D ATB, Ramsay Jones ```