From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACBB1427F6;
	Tue, 28 Mar 2023 21:25:11 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1779742B8E;
	Tue, 28 Mar 2023 21:25:11 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mail-pj1-f46.google.com (mail-pj1-f46.google.com
 [209.85.216.46]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D6C3427F2
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 28 Mar 2023 21:25:09 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by mail-pj1-f46.google.com with SMTP id x15so11867158pjk.2
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue, 28 Mar 2023 12:25:09 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=networkplumber-org.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; t=1680031509;
 h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to
 :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date
 :message-id:reply-to;
 bh=G+5oy6YE3iiuVwK5UZvdFJWTPQ/HTLvwppgWATQ1rVw=;
 b=Oj3f7/uWmICZU+EW2oqbEYaBdUHpuZhU82gIULnO+DjH8M8GePeBC52VRx2754BIPw
 OqXrgqZSHhLM9Enqa1AHUwoKA6BxWtdyD7UXpgVT1quUBRruV5DnsNfe85TXK3ROPKZj
 qFItL5FyU4l4OnFFdCs6iqQjw/ZBe8EMBYQeCP4JM6kanorpCZ5qJzgx7xBQmz7Y5bRj
 6mj9ttnhGe9lmvDdFhQ20U7ghY5IfEQxphQuiQys1QNu4Mndmw04px03ubadHIm5JQR+
 Nl/P7+EPAlHQQ/Fp3AG9wydMK6JQRXjkTl2eC3m/EvI/axDxjmxBUbirdeGXBoxLnWqT
 sYxQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1680031509;
 h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to
 :message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc
 :subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
 bh=G+5oy6YE3iiuVwK5UZvdFJWTPQ/HTLvwppgWATQ1rVw=;
 b=xZpcMslGTl2BlMsMsjmybpTmDt6RwNY1mmp8bnIuSkSCbVcWW9sdwspyteToLlsdQN
 5Jg1pk3sBjs21AEOJJpTYFqdyPZ7jxIZUPiIvg5jFlfpvZ+5rRXm+7eA2oRwgMpPnh9i
 GLGHZJ2qBM/K9kuOy26y2aL3r8/zQUtfmVuRPtMNu8QXx2HEhgqWeIZeTMgCGkDKiaMn
 6nY0nUQieY3OqI1n/R7/CLv3BK8VtXVbIk5YCc6qOpH6Qg79sOO/crr9WhWEMXFo2qZB
 xrZGZiwUoPC/v+woD2R2KdX7zl8fLLBuCbjEDyXlULzdkL/CoHurPKXRJxgfXN3yzrZq
 JA4w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9cVTEd9aZ0m3rhS3aUB06KdZcxb2k6c+xYb6dJgSCRwYdpxKMyJ
 WOKxiFroEBGapWy3e/mJ4WMmvw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350bHfo3qHd4vdOQltvy2YHIu784/7+Ur1Bd8gwpgf1s+rYllU7C0hsjFYEnt7jLwJwKsbULbjQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:f545:b0:1a1:7da3:ef5b with SMTP id
 h5-20020a170902f54500b001a17da3ef5bmr15986044plf.7.1680031508721; 
 Tue, 28 Mar 2023 12:25:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hermes.local (204-195-120-218.wavecable.com. [204.195.120.218])
 by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
 f10-20020a17090274ca00b0019c2b1c4db1sm21350421plt.239.2023.03.28.12.25.08
 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
 Tue, 28 Mar 2023 12:25:08 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2023 12:25:06 -0700
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Joyce Kong <joyce.kong@arm.com>
Cc: reshma.pattan@intel.com, konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru, dev@dpdk.org,
 nd@arm.com, stable@dpdk.org, Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pdump: fix build issue with GCC 12
Message-ID: <20230328122506.340e58ba@hermes.local>
In-Reply-To: <20230327070712.280265-1-joyce.kong@arm.com>
References: <20230327070712.280265-1-joyce.kong@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org

On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 07:07:12 +0000
Joyce Kong <joyce.kong@arm.com> wrote:

> Actually, this is an alias warning as -O3 enables strict alias.
> This patch fixes it by replacing 'dup_bufs' with '&dup_bufs[0]'
> as the compiler represents them differently.

This looks more like a compiler bug, since both should be
equivalent in C.