From nobody Tue Feb 10 07:45:40 2026 Received: from mail-wm1-f44.google.com (mail-wm1-f44.google.com [209.85.128.44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE1741AF0A4 for ; Sat, 11 Jan 2025 15:09:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.44 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736608147; cv=none; b=FoNGOqyvizqYY+4BpySNo6sWp/8wfgExdlI4LNj0exv4AEhLxVq5DQDN3Xuz+iUVb/A+FOEBju+RQtX1ElyaFEa8cGSTFQTM8LlDVaZPGbpkek5hLBhdzKzDm9XLDdUS4cHfwgiRI8NS8BtXZC8Vm3tMxDIyecFcshbbHH8iQYA= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736608147; c=relaxed/simple; bh=70xwLrprGfV59lNF8s4RZtXUu1dNiR8GVeqFC80Biis=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Disposition; b=in1Ldl4RYH0RWmVYJjds14sOlny+AMVxk3HV54dCd5oj9P/0MSihWQ00tgVjC4Hghf2RwzKmPiIETcV3YP+So1iBSKCQ2Iud9eR/JJelpJ1MyYFOCaIY8G06A29Uzc5T/WE1l92BPVyThWgcSXlrsdFixzCATv7vP9Q04VCC1pk= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=Ft0E/D3z; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.44 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Ft0E/D3z" Received: by mail-wm1-f44.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-436341f575fso31055595e9.1 for ; Sat, 11 Jan 2025 07:09:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1736608144; x=1737212944; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:mime-version :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=Nt6rAQDmj7inYnwWvjhTb39LKChKA1TheBVsdhMbTrg=; b=Ft0E/D3z+MsvhuE1rjJr0uqYzDAXsQo/XQrlLhCgnES5Uze7Pw8TvF95m4JjQAndVH n1T+OQwvi8GMw+Bp6moKiP405gCoRxXgy8A8GVieyTFqOTBLwtebY00skUjj/ApeC6aA HeIWFAAHfeFCLda3NUxxXsfbjM0y95HjwX05YXG4ufSpgGrd/Bpf7KK/PTLdMBCYPIyp SFEMxFwuJJ5js0nF+ztDJspVUIEWpqxcjxMntVqt4mNXotYc36fWSaM2SZh1s3xyUReq c8SKYGdaNPrMWbPAOzL2rjbcgm7eYr98Uzfek1rOqvDfHW1lDwxCDbhLox32lJOZwUvi wZ0g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1736608144; x=1737212944; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:mime-version :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Nt6rAQDmj7inYnwWvjhTb39LKChKA1TheBVsdhMbTrg=; b=ajKVplfmMBW5ydFEYYmOQkRaoDJbDpVNzmYthu/Uzm6xD413OUlhjFMH3L/Jub1d0S 6b8INUWaGPquWHQLyf8oxNDCKdaiKuONrkRE6jWU5wPhb7XCtYaUn7z/KweFifj3jagZ icLJybHPBVlOX7fLk0AJUtd+NuAAQcn/ekXirjNeCoRkPuf0pC9pgkdFZQS1LRtW02Vl krjmxeHg5Bca+23GpkA07AJzGkbYWuPpenrtv2yEBIrHrFsPIEt1d6gT8iP4nverlQgz tMHnciMtoj3Dp9V1mP1e8Z1QMmlipV+XjQUXgHvnTL3Ap+KDNubAx70eXoEjSdJ1D6Z0 hhXw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCX8QamhVxLYjix6Cv8Rq1CSGrWu+fCcdKPYmbKj83y2beMHEN1mFvfK5KpUCj7Yk7jD56aRahVRK4h12YQ=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy/TlGrJt9V0ObzlRdACnDXuLOgN5OqhFspzk2N4c3pe/OCm1m+ UtdeiVM6jGbEbvEMn4PNKCmNn5Tsr5Wq1EVJWKV0Jx+OdZfSofPo X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncvi9tx9jyJGW+zmL40nzjdrkO1ESaczBZmL2u/+u+IcV8cthoPRcpVY96jMOx9 hOBnRFTguJGPSbUuSxkHKFNtFym3BuEdeveF72Nfze1DUmIv+qSMV+o6V03V2mjjBjGSkZvrU4/ lCC7RlC6zx76Lhy0YGbTdo5VKeynP+fjCoRTClaUefahQM8beCojf3vObyJ7pT0m9trUvtQ4zIV wmC0P1qY54CL1EfGnXJU97wsvhIRQa7eDG407TV454lOR+sZQleafP71w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHgSwDg8T+SP/71HPSM9dqkAgP5umCPT0/LIrMvu3cxwhUQBAc/I1W+a7u3V1/I/FV9gDkREA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:138a:b0:434:f0df:9fd with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-436e2679a1cmr26207725e9.2.1736608143880; Sat, 11 Jan 2025 07:09:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from gmail.com ([45.250.247.51]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-436e9d8fd03sm87648335e9.6.2025.01.11.07.09.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 11 Jan 2025 07:09:03 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2025 20:38:56 +0530 From: Brahmajit To: dhowells@redhat.com Cc: netfs@lists.linux.dev, djwong@kernel.org, linux-kernel Subject: Error while building with GCC 15 Message-ID: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable While building with GCC 15 I noticed these build error fs/netfs/fscache_cache.c:375:67: error: initializer-string for array of =E2= =80=98char=E2=80=99 is too long [-Werror=3Dunterminated-string-initializati= on] 375 | static const char fscache_cache_states[NR__FSCACHE_CACHE_STATE] =3D= "-PAEW"; | ^= ~~~~~~ cc1: all warnings being treated as errors fs/netfs/fscache_cookie.c:32:69: error: initializer-string for array of =E2= =80=98char=E2=80=99 is too long [-Werror=3Dunterminated-string-initializati= on] 32 | static const char fscache_cookie_states[FSCACHE_COOKIE_STATE__NR] = =3D "-LCAIFUWRD"; | = ^~~~~~~~~~~~ cc1: all warnings being treated as errors This due to GCC 15 having enabled -Wunterminated-string-initialization by default[0]. I was first planning on doing something like --- a/fs/netfs/fscache_cache.c +++ b/fs/netfs/fscache_cache.c @@ -372,7 +372,7 @@ void fscache_withdraw_cache(struct fscache_cache *cache) EXPORT_SYMBOL(fscache_withdraw_cache); =20 #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS -static const char fscache_cache_states[NR__FSCACHE_CACHE_STATE] =3D "-PAEW= "; +static const char fscache_cache_states[NR__FSCACHE_CACHE_STATE] =3D { '-',= 'P', 'A', 'E', 'W' }; =20 /* * Generate a list of caches in /proc/fs/fscache/caches But then I remembered I did solve a similar bug before where the developer agreed to just increasing the array size by one[1]. So something like this: --- a/fs/netfs/fscache_cache.c +++ b/fs/netfs/fscache_cache.c @@ -372,7 +372,7 @@ void fscache_withdraw_cache(struct fscache_cache *cache) EXPORT_SYMBOL(fscache_withdraw_cache); =20 #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS -static const char fscache_cache_states[NR__FSCACHE_CACHE_STATE] =3D "-PAEW= "; +static const char fscache_cache_states[NR__FSCACHE_CACHE_STATE + 1] =3D "-= PAEW"; =20 /* * Generate a list of caches in /proc/fs/fscache/caches So I'm wondering which one would be more appropriate here. Would really like some help/recommendation then I can send in the patch. [0]: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Warning-Options.html#index-Wno-unte= rminated-string-initialization [1]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/com= mit/?id=3Da500f3751d3c861be7e4463c933cf467240cca5d --=20 Regards, Brahmajit