1019381 - Cherrypick clang and gcc warning fixes from upstream jemalloc

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

Description

[Chris Peterson [:cpeterson]]

Attachment: jemalloc-warnings.patch

This patch fixes the following warnings I see when building Firefox for Android (gcc) and OS X (clang):

src/prof.c:1070:11 [-Wsign-compare] comparison of integers of different signs: 'int64_t' (aka 'long long') and 'unsigned long long'
src/util.c:179:55 [-Wsign-compare] comparison of integers of different signs: 'uintmax_t' (aka 'unsigned long') and 'int'
src/util.c:180:60 [-Wsign-compare] comparison of integers of different signs: 'uintmax_t' (aka 'unsigned long') and 'int'
src/util.c:181:60 [-Wsign-compare] comparison of integers of different signs: 'uintmax_t' (aka 'unsigned long') and 'int'
src/util.c:551:35 [-Wsign-compare] signed and unsigned type in conditional expression

src/util.c:502:5 [-Wsometimes-uninitialized] variable 'val' is used uninitialized whenever switch default is taken
src/util.c:512:5 [-Wsometimes-uninitialized] variable 'val' is used uninitialized whenever switch default is taken
src/util.c:521:5 [-Wsometimes-uninitialized] variable 'val' is used uninitialized whenever switch default is taken
src/util.c:530:5 [-Wsometimes-uninitialized] variable 'val' is used uninitialized whenever switch default is taken

I fixed these warnings in upstream jemalloc here:
https://github.com/jemalloc/jemalloc/pull/86

Comment 1

[Mike Hommey [:glandium]]

Comment on attachment 8433048 [details] [diff] [review]
jemalloc-warnings.patch

Review of attachment 8433048 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------

You need to add a patch in memory/jemalloc, and reference it in memory/jemalloc/update.sh.

Comment 2

[Mike Hommey [:glandium]]

(BTW, if you feel like looking at the warnings building on windows emits, be my guest ;) )

Comment 3

[Chris Peterson [:cpeterson]]

(In reply to Mike Hommey [:glandium] from comment #1)
> You need to add a patch in memory/jemalloc, and reference it in
> memory/jemalloc/update.sh.

Do we need an in-tree patch even though these fixes are already in jemalloc upstream? The next time we update our in-tree copy of jemalloc, these fixes won't need to be restored with a local patch.

Comment 4

[Mike Hommey [:glandium]]

(In reply to Chris Peterson (:cpeterson) from comment #3)
> (In reply to Mike Hommey [:glandium] from comment #1)
> > You need to add a patch in memory/jemalloc, and reference it in
> > memory/jemalloc/update.sh.
> 
> Do we need an in-tree patch even though these fixes are already in jemalloc
> upstream?

All the in-tree patches are already in jemalloc upstream. Still, we want that running update.sh without updating upstream.info yields the same tree.

Comment 5

[Chris Peterson [:cpeterson]]

Attachment: jemalloc-warnings-v2.patch

Patch v2 adds in-tree patch 0004-Fix-clang-warnings.patch and references it in update.sh.

Comment 6

[Chris Peterson [:cpeterson]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/257269554ad9

Comment 7

[Ed Morley [:emorley]]

https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/257269554ad9