On 08/26/2014 01:41 PM, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (10/04/14 15:05), Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
> On (10/04/14 14:10), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 01:44:08PM +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>>> On (10/04/14 12:11), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 2014-04-10 at 11:11 +0200, Sumit Bose wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 10:34:10AM +0200, Pavel Reichl wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 21:19 +0200, Sumit Bose wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 09, 2014 at 07:27:28PM +0200, Pavel Reichl
wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 2014-04-07 at 18:13 +0200, Sumit Bose wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 02:22:04PM +0200, Pavel
Reichl wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I noticed these two warnings in clang.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It would be great if the 2nd patch could be
checked by Sumit to make
>>>>>>>>>> sure that the return value wasn't ignored on
purpose.
>>>>>>>>> yes, I would prefer to ignore errors here. There
might be various cases
>>>>>>>>> were we are not able to resolve a single SID but
still can proceed with
>>>>>>>>> the others.
>>>>>>>> Please see attached patch. Feel free to NACK it, if you
think it's more
>>>>>>>> pain than gain.
>>>>>>> Why not do something useful to avoid the compiler warning and
print a
>>>>>>> SSSDBG_TRACE_ALL debug message with the returned error code
in the case
>>>>>>> of an error?
>>>>>> Hello Sumit,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just took your previous response too literally - "I would
prefer to
>>>>>> ignore errors here" - my bad. (Hopefully final) patch
attached.
>>>>> Thank you. ACK
>>>>>
>>>>> I wonder if the explicit (unsigned int) casts are needed to avoid
>>>>> warnings or if you are just calling them to be on the safe side?
>>>> Honestly, I just copy&past them. When I removed them I didn't
notice any
>>> If you copy&past this code then explicit casting is in two places.
>>> In future, it can in 3, 4, 5 ...
>>>
>>>> relevant clang or gcc warnings. I asked Jakub and he advised me that I
>>>> could have used formatting macros PRIu16 and PRIu32.
>>>>
>>>> I would suggest to leave patch as is for now.
>>>>
>>> Is it a problem to send another patch?
>>>
>>> LS
>> If you have time to convert the debug messages, then by all means, send
>> a patch. Maybe this could be a nice intern task? :-)
What about this patch?
LS
Your patch definitely fixes clang warning. I studied the patch and
nearby code and it seems to me that we are not breaking anything.
It would be great to refactor this function soon as I personally find it
really hard to understand.
ACK
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel