diff mbox series

[1/1] EDAC/sb_edac: Fix the compile warning of large frame size

Message ID 20240829120903.84152-1-qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com (mailing list archive)
State New
Headers show
Series [1/1] EDAC/sb_edac: Fix the compile warning of large frame size | expand

Commit Message

Zhuo, Qiuxu Aug. 29, 2024, 12:09 p.m. UTC 
Compiling sb_edac driver with GCC 11.4.0 and the W=1 option reported
the following warning:

  drivers/edac/sb_edac.c: In function ‘sbridge_mce_output_error’:
  drivers/edac/sb_edac.c:3249:1: warning: the frame size of 1032 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes [-Wframe-larger-than=]

As there is no concurrent invocation of sbridge_mce_output_error(),
fix this warning by moving the large-size variables 'msg' and 'msg_full'
from the stack to the pre-allocated data segment.

Reported-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Tested-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Qiuxu Zhuo <qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com>
---
 drivers/edac/sb_edac.c | 25 +++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

Comments

Tony Luck Sept. 3, 2024, 8:54 p.m. UTC | #1 
> Compiling sb_edac driver with GCC 11.4.0 and the W=1 option reported
> the following warning:
>
>   drivers/edac/sb_edac.c: In function ‘sbridge_mce_output_error’:
>   drivers/edac/sb_edac.c:3249:1: warning: the frame size of 1032 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes [-Wframe-larger-than=]
>
> As there is no concurrent invocation of sbridge_mce_output_error(),
> fix this warning by moving the large-size variables 'msg' and 'msg_full'
> from the stack to the pre-allocated data segment.
>
> Reported-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
> Tested-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Qiuxu Zhuo <qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com>

Qiuxu,

Applied this and three other EDAC driver patches posted while I was away
to the RAS edac-drivers branch and merged that into edac-for-next

Thanks

-Tony
Zhuo, Qiuxu Sept. 4, 2024, 3:08 a.m. UTC | #2 
> From: Luck, Tony <tony.luck@intel.com>
> [...]
> > As there is no concurrent invocation of sbridge_mce_output_error(),
> > fix this warning by moving the large-size variables 'msg' and 'msg_full'
> > from the stack to the pre-allocated data segment.
> >
> > Reported-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
> > Tested-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Qiuxu Zhuo <qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com>
> 
> Qiuxu,
> 
> Applied this and three other EDAC driver patches posted while I was away to
> the RAS edac-drivers branch and merged that into edac-for-next

Thanks Tony :-).
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/edac/sb_edac.c b/drivers/edac/sb_edac.c
index e5c05a876947..e1cb9918b5a4 100644
--- a/drivers/edac/sb_edac.c
+++ b/drivers/edac/sb_edac.c
@@ -29,6 +29,8 @@ 
 
 /* Static vars */
 static LIST_HEAD(sbridge_edac_list);
+static char sb_msg[256];
+static char sb_msg_full[512];
 
 /*
  * Alter this version for the module when modifications are made
@@ -3079,7 +3081,6 @@  static void sbridge_mce_output_error(struct mem_ctl_info *mci,
 	struct mem_ctl_info *new_mci;
 	struct sbridge_pvt *pvt = mci->pvt_info;
 	enum hw_event_mc_err_type tp_event;
-	char *optype, msg[256], msg_full[512];
 	bool ripv = GET_BITFIELD(m->mcgstatus, 0, 0);
 	bool overflow = GET_BITFIELD(m->status, 62, 62);
 	bool uncorrected_error = GET_BITFIELD(m->status, 61, 61);
@@ -3095,10 +3096,10 @@  static void sbridge_mce_output_error(struct mem_ctl_info *mci,
 	 * aligned address reported by patrol scrubber.
 	 */
 	u32 lsb = GET_BITFIELD(m->misc, 0, 5);
+	char *optype, *area_type = "DRAM";
 	long channel_mask, first_channel;
 	u8  rank = 0xff, socket, ha;
 	int rc, dimm;
-	char *area_type = "DRAM";
 
 	if (pvt->info.type != SANDY_BRIDGE)
 		recoverable = true;
@@ -3168,7 +3169,7 @@  static void sbridge_mce_output_error(struct mem_ctl_info *mci,
 			channel = knl_channel_remap(m->bank == 16, channel);
 			channel_mask = 1 << channel;
 
-			snprintf(msg, sizeof(msg),
+			snprintf(sb_msg, sizeof(sb_msg),
 				"%s%s err_code:%04x:%04x channel:%d (DIMM_%c)",
 				overflow ? " OVERFLOW" : "",
 				(uncorrected_error && recoverable)
@@ -3177,23 +3178,23 @@  static void sbridge_mce_output_error(struct mem_ctl_info *mci,
 			edac_mc_handle_error(tp_event, mci, core_err_cnt,
 				m->addr >> PAGE_SHIFT, m->addr & ~PAGE_MASK, 0,
 				channel, 0, -1,
-				optype, msg);
+				optype, sb_msg);
 		}
 		return;
 	} else if (lsb < 12) {
 		rc = get_memory_error_data(mci, m->addr, &socket, &ha,
 					   &channel_mask, &rank,
-					   &area_type, msg);
+					   &area_type, sb_msg);
 	} else {
 		rc = get_memory_error_data_from_mce(mci, m, &socket, &ha,
-						    &channel_mask, msg);
+						    &channel_mask, sb_msg);
 	}
 
 	if (rc < 0)
 		goto err_parsing;
 	new_mci = get_mci_for_node_id(socket, ha);
 	if (!new_mci) {
-		strcpy(msg, "Error: socket got corrupted!");
+		strcpy(sb_msg, "Error: socket got corrupted!");
 		goto err_parsing;
 	}
 	mci = new_mci;
@@ -3218,7 +3219,7 @@  static void sbridge_mce_output_error(struct mem_ctl_info *mci,
 	 */
 	if (!pvt->is_lockstep && !pvt->is_cur_addr_mirrored && !pvt->is_close_pg)
 		channel = first_channel;
-	snprintf(msg_full, sizeof(msg_full),
+	snprintf(sb_msg_full, sizeof(sb_msg_full),
 		 "%s%s area:%s err_code:%04x:%04x socket:%d ha:%d channel_mask:%ld rank:%d %s",
 		 overflow ? " OVERFLOW" : "",
 		 (uncorrected_error && recoverable) ? " recoverable" : "",
@@ -3226,9 +3227,9 @@  static void sbridge_mce_output_error(struct mem_ctl_info *mci,
 		 mscod, errcode,
 		 socket, ha,
 		 channel_mask,
-		 rank, msg);
+		 rank, sb_msg);
 
-	edac_dbg(0, "%s\n", msg_full);
+	edac_dbg(0, "%s\n", sb_msg_full);
 
 	/* FIXME: need support for channel mask */
 
@@ -3239,12 +3240,12 @@  static void sbridge_mce_output_error(struct mem_ctl_info *mci,
 	edac_mc_handle_error(tp_event, mci, core_err_cnt,
 			     m->addr >> PAGE_SHIFT, m->addr & ~PAGE_MASK, 0,
 			     channel, dimm, -1,
-			     optype, msg_full);
+			     optype, sb_msg_full);
 	return;
 err_parsing:
 	edac_mc_handle_error(tp_event, mci, core_err_cnt, 0, 0, 0,
 			     -1, -1, -1,
-			     msg, "");
+			     sb_msg, "");
 
 }