topology: fix some gcc warnings

From: Mengdong Lin <[email protected]>

Fix warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions [-Wsign-compare]

ABI objects use type _le32, which is converted to host unsigned integer. So the iterator 'i' in a loop as below should also be unsigned. for (i = 0; i < pcm->num_streams; i++)

                ^

Signed-off-by Mengdong Lin <[email protected]>

src/topology/ctl.c +4 -2

index 7d8787f..6dc3b3d 100644
@@ -676,7 +676,8 @@ int tplg_add_mixer(snd_tplg_t *tplg, struct snd_tplg_mixer_template *mixer,
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_private *priv = mixer->priv;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_mixer_control *mc;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int ret, i;
+	int ret;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	tplg_dbg(" Control Mixer: %s\n", mixer->hdr.name);
 

@@ -743,7 +744,8 @@ int tplg_add_enum(snd_tplg_t *tplg, struct snd_tplg_enum_template *enum_ctl,
 {
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_enum_control *ec;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int ret, i;
+	int ret;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	tplg_dbg(" Control Enum: %s\n", enum_ctl->hdr.name);
 

src/topology/pcm.c +2 -2

index 9b7e402..4b7c058 100644
@@ -522,7 +522,7 @@ int tplg_add_pcm_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg, snd_tplg_obj_template_t *t)
 	struct snd_tplg_pcm_template *pcm_tpl = t->pcm;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_pcm *pcm;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int i;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	tplg_dbg("PCM: %s, DAI %s\n", pcm_tpl->pcm_name, pcm_tpl->dai_name);
 

@@ -564,7 +564,7 @@ int tplg_add_link_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg, snd_tplg_obj_template_t *t)
 	struct snd_tplg_link_template *link = t->link;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_link_config *lk;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int i;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	if (t->type != SND_TPLG_TYPE_BE && t->type != SND_TPLG_TYPE_CC)
 		return -EINVAL;

Signature · 1 line

2.5.0

-----Original Message-----
From: Takashi Iwai [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 3:16 PM
To: [email protected]

Quoted 6 lines · On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 08:23:07 +0100, [email protected] wrote:

From: Mengdong Lin <[email protected]>

Fix warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions [-Wsign-compare]

Quoted 4 lines

ABI objects use type _le32, which is converted to host unsigned integer. So the iterator 'i' in a loop as below should also be unsigned. for (i = 0; i < pcm->num_streams; i++)

                ^

Using an unsigned int for the generic loop count like i is strange.

Rather compare with the original value in the template, which is actually int.

Takashi

src/topology/ctl.c int tplg_add_mixer(snd_tplg_t *tplg, struct

Quoted 7 lines

Signed-off-by Mengdong Lin <[email protected]>

src/topology/ctl.c index renamed from src/topology/ctl.c +0 -0

7d8787f..6dc3b3d 100644

src/topology/ctl.c +0 -0

@@ -676,7 +676,8 @@ int tplg_add_mixer(snd_tplg_t *tplg, struct

snd_tplg_mixer_template *mixer,

src/topology/pcm.c int tplg_add_pcm_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg,

Quoted 24 lines

src/topology/ctl.c +4 -2

 	struct snd_soc_tplg_private *priv = mixer->priv;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_mixer_control *mc;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int ret, i;
+	int ret;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	tplg_dbg(" Control Mixer: %s\n", mixer->hdr.name);
 

@@ -743,7 +744,8 @@ int tplg_add_enum(snd_tplg_t *tplg, struct
 snd_tplg_enum_template *enum_ctl,  {
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_enum_control *ec;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int ret, i;
+	int ret;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	tplg_dbg(" Control Enum: %s\n", enum_ctl->hdr.name);
 

src/topology/pcm.c index renamed from src/topology/pcm.c +0 -0

9b7e402..4b7c058 100644

src/topology/pcm.c +0 -0

@@ -522,7 +522,7 @@ int tplg_add_pcm_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg,

snd_tplg_obj_template_t *t)

src/topology/pcm.c int tplg_add_pcm_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg, snd_tplg_obj_template_t *t)

Quoted 7 lines

src/topology/pcm.c +1 -1

 	struct snd_tplg_pcm_template *pcm_tpl = t->pcm;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_pcm *pcm;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int i;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	tplg_dbg("PCM: %s, DAI %s\n", pcm_tpl->pcm_name,

pcm_tpl->dai_name);

src/topology/pcm.c int tplg_add_link_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg,

Quoted 2 lines

src/topology/pcm.c +0 -0

@@ -564,7 +564,7 @@ int tplg_add_link_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg,

snd_tplg_obj_template_t *t)

Quoted 11 lines

src/topology/pcm.c +1 -2

 	struct snd_tplg_link_template *link = t->link;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_link_config *lk;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int i;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	if (t->type != SND_TPLG_TYPE_BE && t->type != SND_TPLG_TYPE_CC)
 		return -EINVAL;
--

2.5.0

Quoted 19 lines

-----Original Message-----
From: Takashi Iwai [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 3:16 PM
To: [email protected]

Quoted 10 lines · On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 08:23:07 +0100, [email protected] wrote:

From: Mengdong Lin <[email protected]>

Fix warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions [-Wsign-compare]

ABI objects use type _le32, which is converted to host unsigned integer. So the iterator 'i' in a loop as below should also be unsigned. for (i = 0; i < pcm->num_streams; i++)

                ^

Quoted 1 line

Using an unsigned int for the generic loop count like i is strange.

Yes.

Quoted 1 line

Rather compare with the original value in the template, which is actually int.

Are you suggesting not change the code?

The "pcm->num_streams" here is __le32 defined in ABI:

struct snd_soc_tplg_pcm {
	...
	__le32 num_streams;	/* number of streams */
	...
} __attribute__((packed));

It seems gcc takes it as unsigned integer and so I get the warning.

Thanks
Mengdong

Quoted 59 lines

Takashi

src/topology/ctl.c int tplg_add_mixer(snd_tplg_t *tplg, struct

Quoted 7 lines

Signed-off-by Mengdong Lin <[email protected]>

src/topology/ctl.c index renamed from src/topology/ctl.c +0 -0

7d8787f..6dc3b3d 100644

src/topology/ctl.c +0 -0

@@ -676,7 +676,8 @@ int tplg_add_mixer(snd_tplg_t *tplg, struct

snd_tplg_mixer_template *mixer,

src/topology/pcm.c int tplg_add_pcm_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg,

Quoted 24 lines

src/topology/ctl.c +4 -2

 	struct snd_soc_tplg_private *priv = mixer->priv;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_mixer_control *mc;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int ret, i;
+	int ret;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	tplg_dbg(" Control Mixer: %s\n", mixer->hdr.name);
 

@@ -743,7 +744,8 @@ int tplg_add_enum(snd_tplg_t *tplg, struct
 snd_tplg_enum_template *enum_ctl,  {
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_enum_control *ec;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int ret, i;
+	int ret;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	tplg_dbg(" Control Enum: %s\n", enum_ctl->hdr.name);
 

src/topology/pcm.c index renamed from src/topology/pcm.c +0 -0

9b7e402..4b7c058 100644

src/topology/pcm.c +0 -0

@@ -522,7 +522,7 @@ int tplg_add_pcm_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg,

snd_tplg_obj_template_t *t)

src/topology/pcm.c int tplg_add_pcm_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg, snd_tplg_obj_template_t *t)

Quoted 7 lines

src/topology/pcm.c +1 -1

 	struct snd_tplg_pcm_template *pcm_tpl = t->pcm;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_pcm *pcm;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int i;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	tplg_dbg("PCM: %s, DAI %s\n", pcm_tpl->pcm_name,

pcm_tpl->dai_name);

src/topology/pcm.c int tplg_add_link_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg,

Quoted 2 lines

src/topology/pcm.c +0 -0

@@ -564,7 +564,7 @@ int tplg_add_link_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg,

snd_tplg_obj_template_t *t)

Quoted 11 lines

src/topology/pcm.c +1 -2

 	struct snd_tplg_link_template *link = t->link;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_link_config *lk;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int i;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	if (t->type != SND_TPLG_TYPE_BE && t->type != SND_TPLG_TYPE_CC)
 		return -EINVAL;
--

2.5.0

From: Mengdong Lin <[email protected]>

Fix gcc warning: 'write_data_block' defined but not used [-Wunused-function].

Signed-off-by Mengdong Lin <[email protected]>

src/topology/builder.c +0 -24

index 154bd63..b0ba54e 100644
@@ -82,30 +82,6 @@ static int write_block_header(snd_tplg_t *tplg, unsigned int type,
 	return bytes;
 }
 
-static int write_data_block(snd_tplg_t *tplg, int size, int tplg_type,
-	const char *obj_name, void *data)
-{
-	int ret;
-
-	/* write the header for this block */
-	ret = write_block_header(tplg, tplg_type, 0,
-		tplg->version, 0, size, 1);
-	if (ret < 0) {
-		SNDERR("error: failed to write %s block %d\n", obj_name, ret);
-		return ret;
-	}
-
-	verbose(tplg, " %s : write %d bytes\n", obj_name, size);
-
-	ret = write(tplg->out_fd, data, size);
-	if (ret < 0) {
-		SNDERR("error: failed to write %s %d\n", obj_name, ret);
-		return ret;
-	}
-
-	return 0;
-}
-
 static int write_elem_block(snd_tplg_t *tplg,
 	struct list_head *base, int size, int tplg_type, const char *obj_name)
 {

Signature · 1 line

2.5.0

From: Mengdong Lin <[email protected]>

Fix gcc warning when -Wunused-variable is set.

Signed-off-by Mengdong Lin <[email protected]>

src/topology/pcm.c +1 -4

index 4b7c058..d90a9ea 100644
@@ -58,7 +58,6 @@ static int tplg_build_pcm_caps(snd_tplg_t *tplg, struct tplg_elem *elem)
 	struct tplg_elem *ref_elem = NULL;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_pcm *pcm;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_stream_caps *caps;
-	struct snd_soc_tplg_stream *stream;
 	unsigned int i;
 
 	pcm = elem->pcm;

@@ -273,7 +272,7 @@ int tplg_parse_stream_caps(snd_tplg_t *tplg, snd_config_t *cfg,
 	struct tplg_elem *elem = private;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_pcm *pcm;
 	const char *id, *value;
-	int err, stream;
+	int stream;
 
 	pcm = elem->pcm;
 

@@ -384,7 +383,6 @@ int tplg_parse_be(snd_tplg_t *tplg,
 	snd_config_iterator_t i, next;
 	snd_config_t *n;
 	const char *id, *val = NULL;
-	int err;
 
 	elem = tplg_elem_new_common(tplg, cfg, NULL, SND_TPLG_TYPE_BE);
 	if (!elem)

@@ -438,7 +436,6 @@ int tplg_parse_cc(snd_tplg_t *tplg,
 	snd_config_iterator_t i, next;
 	snd_config_t *n;
 	const char *id, *val = NULL;
-	int err;
 
 	elem = tplg_elem_new_common(tplg, cfg, NULL, SND_TPLG_TYPE_CC);
 	if (!elem)

Signature · 1 line

2.5.0

From: Mengdong Lin <[email protected]>

Fix gcc warning: comparison of unsigned expression < 0 is always false [-Wtype-limits]

The ABI object channel->id is _le32 and is converted to host unsigned integer. It cannot be < 0.

Signed-off-by Mengdong Lin <[email protected]>

src/topology/channel.c +4 -2

index 9bc5d5a..c2f1fea 100644
@@ -80,6 +80,7 @@ int tplg_parse_channel(snd_tplg_t *tplg,
 	snd_config_t *n;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_channel *channel = private;
 	const char *id, *value;
+	int channel_id;
 
 	if (tplg->channel_idx >= SND_SOC_TPLG_MAX_CHAN)
 		return -EINVAL;

@@ -88,12 +89,13 @@ int tplg_parse_channel(snd_tplg_t *tplg,
 	snd_config_get_id(cfg, &id);
 	tplg_dbg("\tChannel %s at index %d\n", id, tplg->channel_idx);
 
-	channel->id = lookup_channel(id);
-	if (channel->id < 0) {
+	channel_id = lookup_channel(id);
+	if (channel_id < 0) {
 		SNDERR("error: invalid channel %s\n", id);
 		return -EINVAL;
 	}
 
+	channel->id = channel_id;
 	channel->size = sizeof(*channel);
 	tplg_dbg("\tChan %s = %d\n", id, channel->id);
 

Signature · 1 line

2.5.0

-----Original Message-----
From: Takashi Iwai [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 4:19 PM

Quoted 19 lines · Mengdong

Quoted 19 lines

-----Original Message-----
From: Takashi Iwai [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 3:16 PM
To: [email protected]

Quoted 10 lines · On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 08:23:07 +0100, [email protected] wrote:

From: Mengdong Lin <[email protected]>

Fix warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions [-Wsign-compare]

ABI objects use type _le32, which is converted to host unsigned integer. So the iterator 'i' in a loop as below should also be unsigned. for (i = 0; i < pcm->num_streams; i++)

                ^

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 1 line

Using an unsigned int for the generic loop count like i is strange.

Yes.

Quoted 1 line

Rather compare with the original value in the template, which is actually int.

Are you suggesting not change the code?

No.

Quoted 8 lines

The "pcm->num_streams" here is __le32 defined in ABI:

struct snd_soc_tplg_pcm {
	...
	__le32 num_streams;	/* number of streams */
	...
} __attribute__((packed));

It seems gcc takes it as unsigned integer and so I get the warning.

The problem isn't only about the endianess.
Conceptually, it's wrong to refer directly to le32 data, as it's not being CPU endian. It should have always an endian conversion. Of course, we support only LE32, so it's no big issue, so far.

What you need to refer to is the value in the template instead. It's guaranteed to be CPU endianess, and it's even int.
So, the code would look like:

	for (i = 0; i < pcm_tpl->num_streams; i++)

BTW, I haven't checked whether topology API would "work" on big-endian architecture; does it return an error properly?

Takashi

Quoted 64 lines

Thanks
Mengdong

Quoted 59 lines

Takashi

src/topology/ctl.c int tplg_add_mixer(snd_tplg_t *tplg, struct

Quoted 7 lines

Signed-off-by Mengdong Lin <[email protected]>

src/topology/ctl.c index renamed from src/topology/ctl.c +0 -0

7d8787f..6dc3b3d 100644

src/topology/ctl.c +0 -0

@@ -676,7 +676,8 @@ int tplg_add_mixer(snd_tplg_t *tplg, struct

snd_tplg_mixer_template *mixer,

src/topology/pcm.c int tplg_add_pcm_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg,

Quoted 24 lines

src/topology/ctl.c +4 -2

 	struct snd_soc_tplg_private *priv = mixer->priv;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_mixer_control *mc;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int ret, i;
+	int ret;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	tplg_dbg(" Control Mixer: %s\n", mixer->hdr.name);
 

@@ -743,7 +744,8 @@ int tplg_add_enum(snd_tplg_t *tplg, struct
 snd_tplg_enum_template *enum_ctl,  {
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_enum_control *ec;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int ret, i;
+	int ret;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	tplg_dbg(" Control Enum: %s\n", enum_ctl->hdr.name);
 

src/topology/pcm.c index renamed from src/topology/pcm.c +0 -0

9b7e402..4b7c058 100644

src/topology/pcm.c +0 -0

@@ -522,7 +522,7 @@ int tplg_add_pcm_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg,

snd_tplg_obj_template_t *t)

src/topology/pcm.c int tplg_add_pcm_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg, snd_tplg_obj_template_t *t)

Quoted 7 lines

src/topology/pcm.c +1 -1

 	struct snd_tplg_pcm_template *pcm_tpl = t->pcm;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_pcm *pcm;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int i;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	tplg_dbg("PCM: %s, DAI %s\n", pcm_tpl->pcm_name,

pcm_tpl->dai_name);

src/topology/pcm.c int tplg_add_link_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg,

Quoted 2 lines

src/topology/pcm.c +0 -0

@@ -564,7 +564,7 @@ int tplg_add_link_object(snd_tplg_t *tplg,

snd_tplg_obj_template_t *t)

Quoted 11 lines

src/topology/pcm.c +1 -2

 	struct snd_tplg_link_template *link = t->link;
 	struct snd_soc_tplg_link_config *lk;
 	struct tplg_elem *elem;
-	int i;
+	unsigned int i;
 
 	if (t->type != SND_TPLG_TYPE_BE && t->type != SND_TPLG_TYPE_CC)
 		return -EINVAL;
--

2.5.0

Quoted 50 lines

-----Original Message-----
From: Takashi Iwai [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 4:19 PM

Quoted 19 lines · Mengdong

Quoted 19 lines

-----Original Message-----
From: Takashi Iwai [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 3:16 PM
To: [email protected]

Quoted 10 lines · On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 08:23:07 +0100, [email protected] wrote:

From: Mengdong Lin <[email protected]>

Fix warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions [-Wsign-compare]

ABI objects use type _le32, which is converted to host unsigned integer. So the iterator 'i' in a loop as below should also be unsigned. for (i = 0; i < pcm->num_streams; i++)

                ^

Quoted 7 lines

Quoted 1 line

Using an unsigned int for the generic loop count like i is strange.

Yes.

Quoted 1 line

Rather compare with the original value in the template, which is actually int.

Are you suggesting not change the code?

No.

Quoted 8 lines

The "pcm->num_streams" here is __le32 defined in ABI:

struct snd_soc_tplg_pcm {
	...
	__le32 num_streams;	/* number of streams */
	...
} __attribute__((packed));

It seems gcc takes it as unsigned integer and so I get the warning.

The problem isn't only about the endianess.
Conceptually, it's wrong to refer directly to le32 data, as it's not being CPU endian. It should have always an endian conversion. Of course, we support only LE32, so it's no big issue, so far.

Quoted 6 lines

What you need to refer to is the value in the template instead. It's guaranteed to be CPU endianess, and it's even int.
So, the code would look like:

	for (i = 0; i < pcm_tpl->num_streams; i++)

Okay, I'll revise the patch. Thanks for your suggestion.

Quoted 2 lines

BTW, I haven't checked whether topology API would "work" on big-endian architecture; does it return an error properly?

Sorry, no. I'll check if an API can tell us the host endianness and let topology return an error for big-endian machines.

I had thought to use this API when generating the ABI objects from host type to _le32:
uint32_t htole32(uint32_t host_32bits);

But since I have no big-endian machines to test this, maybe it's better to return an error for them.