um: Increase stack frame size threshold for signal.c
Subsystems (2)
PATCH 1/1 um: Increase stack frame size threshold for signal.c
The signal.c can't use heap for bit data located on stack. However, by default a compiler warns us about overstepping stack frame size threshold:
arch/um/os-Linux/signal.c: In function ‘sig_handler_common’:arch/um/os-Linux/signal.c:51:1: warning: the frame size of 2960 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes [-Wframe-larger-than=]
51 | }
| ^
arch/um/os-Linux/signal.c: In function ‘timer_real_alarm_handler’:
arch/um/os-Linux/signal.c:95:1: warning: the frame size of 2960 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes [-Wframe-larger-than=]
95 | }
| ^Due to above increase stack frame size threshold explicitly for signal.c to avoid unnecessary warning.
--- arch/um/os-Linux/Makefile | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
arch/um/os-Linux/Makefile +2 -0
@@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ obj-y = execvp.o file.o helper.o irq.o main.o mem.o process.o \ registers.o sigio.o signal.o start_up.o time.o tty.o \ umid.o user_syms.o util.o drivers/ skas/ +CFLAGS_signal.o += -Wframe-larger-than=4096 + obj-$(CONFIG_ARCH_REUSE_HOST_VSYSCALL_AREA) += elf_aux.o USER_OBJS := $(user-objs-y) elf_aux.o execvp.o file.o helper.o irq.o \
Signature · 7 lines
2.29.2 _______________________________________________ linux-um mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-um
Quoted 14 lines · Andy Shevchenko
The
signal.ccan't use heap for bit data located on stack. However, by default a compiler warns us about overstepping stack frame size threshold:
arch/um/os-Linux/signal.c: In function ‘sig_handler_common’:arch/um/os-Linux/signal.c:51:1: warning: the frame size of 2960 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes [-Wframe-larger-than=]
51 | }| ^ arch/um/os-Linux/signal.c: In function ‘timer_real_alarm_handler’: arch/um/os-Linux/signal.c:95:1: warning: the frame size of 2960 bytes is larger than 2048 bytes [-Wframe-larger-than=] 95 | } | ^
Quoted 5 lines
Due to above increase stack frame size threshold explicitly for
signal.cto avoid unnecessary warning.Signed-off-by Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>---
Thanks -- this has been annoying me for a while!
I've tested it -- the warning is indeed gone, and nothing else seems to break.
Cheers,
-- David
_______________________________________________
linux-um mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-um