We carry some vendored 3rd-party code in compat/ that does not build
cleanly with -Wunused-parameters. We could mark these with UNUSED, but
there are two reasons not to:
1. This is code imported from elsewhere, so we'd prefer to avoid
modifying it in an invasive way that could create conflicts if we
tried to pull in a new version.
2. These files don't include git-compat-util.h at all, so we'd need to
factor out (or repeat) our UNUSED macro.
In theory we could modify the build process to invoke the compiler with
the extra warning disabled for these files, but there are tricky corner
cases there (e.g., for NO_REGEX we cannot assume that the compiler
understands -Wno-unused-parameter as an option, so we'd have to use our
detect-compiler script).
Instead, let's rely on the gcc diagnostic #pragma. This is horribly
unportable, of course, but it should do what we want. Compilers which
don't understand this particular pragma should ignore it (per the
standard), and compilers which do care about "-Wunused-parameter" will
hopefully respect it, even if they are not gcc (e.g., clang does).
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
GCC v12.x complains thusly:
compat/nedmalloc/nedmalloc.c: In function 'DestroyCaches':
compat/nedmalloc/nedmalloc.c:326:12: error: the comparison will always
evaluate as 'true' for the address of 'caches'
will never be NULL [-Werror=address]
326 | if(p->caches)
| ^
compat/nedmalloc/nedmalloc.c:196:22: note: 'caches' declared here
196 | threadcache *caches[THREADCACHEMAXCACHES];
| ^~~~~~
... and it is correct, of course.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In preparation to building with pedantic mode enabled, change a couple
of places where the current mingw gcc compiler provided with the SDK
reports issues.
A full fix for the incompatible use of (void *) to store function
pointers has been punted, with the minimal change to instead use a
generic function pointer (FARPROC), and therefore the (hopefully)
temporary need to disable incompatible pointer warnings.
Signed-off-by: Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón <carenas@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Move our implementation of strdup(3) out of compat/nedmalloc/ and
allow it to be used independently from USE_NED_ALLOCATOR. The
original nedmalloc doesn't come with strdup() and doesn't need it.
Only _users_ of nedmalloc need it, which was added when we imported
it to our compat/ hierarchy.
This reduces the difference of our copy of nedmalloc from the
original, making it easier to update, and allows for easier testing
and reusing of our version of strdup().
Signed-off-by: Rene Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
With GCC 6, the strdup() function is declared with the "nonnull"
attribute, stating that it is not allowed to pass a NULL value as
parameter.
In nedmalloc()'s reimplementation of strdup(), Postel's Law is heeded
and NULL parameters are handled gracefully. GCC 6 complains about that
now because it thinks that NULL cannot be passed to strdup() anyway.
Because the callers in this project of strdup() must be prepared to
call any implementation of strdup() supplied by the platform, so it
is pointless to pretend that it is OK to call it with NULL.
Remove the conditional based on NULL-ness of the input; this
squelches the warning. Check the return value of malloc() instead
to make sure we actually got the memory to write to.
See https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-6/porting_to.html for details.
Diagnosed-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Some code in nedmalloc is indented in a funny way that could be
misinterpreted as if a line after a for loop was included in the loop
body, when it is not.
GCC 6 complains about this in DEVELOPER=YepSure mode.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When we already know the length of a string (e.g., because
we just malloc'd to fit it), it's nicer to use memcpy than
strcpy, as it makes it more obvious that we are not going to
overflow the buffer (because the size we pass matches the
size in the allocation).
This also eliminates calls to strcpy, which make auditing
the code base harder.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Sparse issues many "Using plain integer as NULL pointer" warnings
while checking nedmalloc.c (at least 98 such warnings before giving
up due to "too many warnings"). In addition, sparse issues some
"non-ANSI function declaration" type warnings for the symbols
'win32_getcurrentthreadid', 'malloc_stats' and 'malloc_footprint'.
In order to suppress the NULL pointer warnings, rather than replace
all uses of '0' as a null pointer representation with NULL, we add
-Wno-non-pointer-null to SPARSE_FLAGS while checking nedmalloc.c.
In order to suppress the "non-ANSI function declaration" warnings,
we simply include the missing 'empty parameter list' prototype (void)
in the function declarations.
Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
On MinGW, GCC 4.7.2 complains about
operation on 'p->m[end]' may be undefined
Fix this by replacing the faulty lines with those of 69825ca from
https://github.com/ned14/nedmalloc/blob/master/nedmalloc.c
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Schuberth <sschuberth@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Nedmalloc's source code has a cute #define construct to avoid inserting
an if() statement, because that might interact badly with enclosing if()
statements. However, GCC > 4 complains with a "warning: value computed
is not used". So we cast the result to "void".
GCC also does not understand the Visual C++ specific pragmas, so we need
to disable them for MinGW.
We need to include malloc.h on Windows even if we happen to compile the
stuff as a MinGW program. Otherwise the function declaration of alloca()
is missing.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The standard allocator on Windows is pretty bad prior
to Windows Vista, and nedmalloc is better than the
modified dlmalloc provided with newer versions of the
MinGW libc.
NedMalloc stats in Git
----------------------
All results are the best result out of 3 runs. The
benchmarks have been done on different hardware, so
the repack times are not comparable.
These benchmarks are all based on 'git repack -adf'
on the Linux kernel.
XP
-----------------------------------------------
MinGW Threads Total Time Speed
-----------------------------------------------
3.4.2 (1T) 00:12:28.422
3.4.2 + nedmalloc (1T) 00:07:25.437 1.68x
3.4.5 (1T) 00:12:20.718
3.4.5 + nedmalloc (1T) 00:07:24.809 1.67x
4.3.3-tdm (1T) 00:12:01.843
4.3.3-tdm + nedmalloc (1T) 00:07:16.468 1.65x
4.3.3-tdm (2T) 00:07:35.062
4.3.3-tdm + nedmalloc (2T) 00:04:57.874 1.54x
Vista
-----------------------------------------------
MinGW Threads Total Time Speed
-----------------------------------------------
4.3.3-tdm (1T) 00:07:40.844
4.3.3-tdm + nedmalloc (1T) 00:07:17.548 1.05x
4.3.3-tdm (2T) 00:05:33.746
4.3.3-tdm + nedmalloc (2T) 00:05:27.334 1.02x
Mac Mini
-----------------------------------------------
GCC Threads Total Time Speed
-----------------------------------------------
i686-darwin9-4.0.1 (2T) 00:09:57.346
i686-darwin9-4.0.1+ned (2T) 00:08:51.072 1.12x
Signed-off-by: Marius Storm-Olsen <marius@trolltech.com>
Signed-off-by: Steffen Prohaska <prohaska@zib.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Jeff King