[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] x86emul: mark the trimmed emulator's section-internal labels maybe-unused
- To: Shuaidong Chen <shuaidong.chen@xxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2026 10:30:31 +0100
- Authentication-results: eu.smtp.expurgate.cloud; dkim=pass header.s=google header.d=suse.com header.i="@suse.com" header.h="Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:Autocrypt:From:Content-Language:References:Cc:To:Subject:User-Agent:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID"
- Autocrypt: addr=jbeulich@xxxxxxxx; keydata= xsDiBFk3nEQRBADAEaSw6zC/EJkiwGPXbWtPxl2xCdSoeepS07jW8UgcHNurfHvUzogEq5xk hu507c3BarVjyWCJOylMNR98Yd8VqD9UfmX0Hb8/BrA+Hl6/DB/eqGptrf4BSRwcZQM32aZK 7Pj2XbGWIUrZrd70x1eAP9QE3P79Y2oLrsCgbZJfEwCgvz9JjGmQqQkRiTVzlZVCJYcyGGsD /0tbFCzD2h20ahe8rC1gbb3K3qk+LpBtvjBu1RY9drYk0NymiGbJWZgab6t1jM7sk2vuf0Py O9Hf9XBmK0uE9IgMaiCpc32XV9oASz6UJebwkX+zF2jG5I1BfnO9g7KlotcA/v5ClMjgo6Gl MDY4HxoSRu3i1cqqSDtVlt+AOVBJBACrZcnHAUSuCXBPy0jOlBhxPqRWv6ND4c9PH1xjQ3NP nxJuMBS8rnNg22uyfAgmBKNLpLgAGVRMZGaGoJObGf72s6TeIqKJo/LtggAS9qAUiuKVnygo 3wjfkS9A3DRO+SpU7JqWdsveeIQyeyEJ/8PTowmSQLakF+3fote9ybzd880fSmFuIEJldWxp Y2ggPGpiZXVsaWNoQHN1c2UuY29tPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJZN5xEAhsDBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYC AwECHgECF4AACgkQoDSui/t3IH4J+wCfQ5jHdEjCRHj23O/5ttg9r9OIruwAn3103WUITZee e7Sbg12UgcQ5lv7SzsFNBFk3nEQQCACCuTjCjFOUdi5Nm244F+78kLghRcin/awv+IrTcIWF hUpSs1Y91iQQ7KItirz5uwCPlwejSJDQJLIS+QtJHaXDXeV6NI0Uef1hP20+y8qydDiVkv6l IreXjTb7DvksRgJNvCkWtYnlS3mYvQ9NzS9PhyALWbXnH6sIJd2O9lKS1Mrfq+y0IXCP10eS FFGg+Av3IQeFatkJAyju0PPthyTqxSI4lZYuJVPknzgaeuJv/2NccrPvmeDg6Coe7ZIeQ8Yj t0ARxu2xytAkkLCel1Lz1WLmwLstV30g80nkgZf/wr+/BXJW/oIvRlonUkxv+IbBM3dX2OV8 AmRv1ySWPTP7AAMFB/9PQK/VtlNUJvg8GXj9ootzrteGfVZVVT4XBJkfwBcpC/XcPzldjv+3 HYudvpdNK3lLujXeA5fLOH+Z/G9WBc5pFVSMocI71I8bT8lIAzreg0WvkWg5V2WZsUMlnDL9 mpwIGFhlbM3gfDMs7MPMu8YQRFVdUvtSpaAs8OFfGQ0ia3LGZcjA6Ik2+xcqscEJzNH+qh8V m5jjp28yZgaqTaRbg3M/+MTbMpicpZuqF4rnB0AQD12/3BNWDR6bmh+EkYSMcEIpQmBM51qM EKYTQGybRCjpnKHGOxG0rfFY1085mBDZCH5Kx0cl0HVJuQKC+dV2ZY5AqjcKwAxpE75MLFkr wkkEGBECAAkFAlk3nEQCGwwACgkQoDSui/t3IH7nnwCfcJWUDUFKdCsBH/E5d+0ZnMQi+G0A nAuWpQkjM1ASeQwSHEeAWPgskBQL
- Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Doug Goldstein <cardoe@xxxxxxxxxx>, Michal Orzel <michal.orzel@xxxxxxx>, Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>, Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>, Teddy Astie <teddy.astie@xxxxxxxxxx>, Dmytro Prokopchuk <dmytro_prokopchuk1@xxxxxxxx>, Grygorii Strashko <grygorii_strashko@xxxxxxxx>, Penny Zheng <penny.zheng@xxxxxxx>, Ray Huang <Ray.Huang@xxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Tue, 10 Nov 2026 09:30:40 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 10.11.2026 08:12, Shuaidong Chen wrote:
> In builds where the FPU, MMX and SIMD sections of the emulator are
> compiled out - with CONFIG_HVM=n, private.h defines X86EMUL_NO_FPU,
> X86EMUL_NO_MMX and X86EMUL_NO_SIMD - every `goto' targeting
> simd_0f_fp, simd_0f_xmm, simd_0f_ymm, simd_0f_cvt, simd_0f_mmx,
> simd_0f_imm8_avx2, simd_0f_imm8_ymm, simd_0f38_common and
> simd_0f3a_common is preprocessed out, while the labels themselves
> stay. They are unused by construction, which the build already
> acknowledges by passing -Wno-unused-label for this translation unit.
If we choose to go this route, why would we then keep passing that extra
compiler option? As to going this route - I wonder what the other x86
maintainers think. Afaic: I can live with the annotations, but I wouldn't
be over happy see them appear (as their amount is only going to grow).
> Say it on the labels as well, the way the rest of the tree does
> (unimplemented_insn here, done in blk.c). That also clears the reports
> MISRA C:2012 Rule 2.6 (advisory) - "A function should not contain unused
> label declarations" - raises against them, with no new deviation:
> docs/misra/deviations.rst already recognises __maybe_unused as the way
> to express this.
Emulator code is excluded from scanning in various other regards. Is there
a particular reason why this rule needs complying with?
Jan
|
