Re: [PATCH 3/5] testsuite/smokey/vxworktests: Fix compile error seen with gcc 16

On Wed, 2026-05-13 at 15:52 +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 13.05.26 14:50, Florian Bezdeka wrote:
> > Fixes the following error:
> > 
> > task-2.c: In function ‘backgroundTask’:
> > task-2.c:26:42: error: variable ‘count’ set but not used [-Werror=unused-but-set-variable=]
> >    26 |         unsigned int safety = 100000000, count = 0;
> >       |                                          ^~~~~
> > cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Florian Bezdeka <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >  testsuite/smokey/vxworkstests/task-2.c | 5 ++---
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/testsuite/smokey/vxworkstests/task-2.c b/testsuite/smokey/vxworkstests/task-2.c
> > index 0cbb9e18a13383418c4360241ef244b8a24da975..ed3e31806baad930bb30edc53d2dc6b6e51d6277 100644
> > --- a/testsuite/smokey/vxworkstests/task-2.c
> > +++ b/testsuite/smokey/vxworkstests/task-2.c
> > @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ static SEM_ID sem_id, fdone_sem_id;
> >  
> >  static void backgroundTask(long arg, ...)
> >  {
> > -	unsigned int safety = 100000000, count = 0;
> > +	unsigned int safety = 100000000;
> >  	int ret;
> >  
> >  	traceobj_enter(&trobj);
> > @@ -35,8 +35,7 @@ static void backgroundTask(long arg, ...)
> >  
> >  	traceobj_mark(&trobj, 2);
> >  
> > -	while (--safety > 0)
> > -		count++;
> > +	while (--safety > 0) {}
> 
> This first of all increases the risk of getting optimized out. I suspect
> this is intended to generate some load, and that needs to be preserved.
> We should likely do that via a busy loop which spins for a number of
> microseconds.
> 

I compared the generated code, where only the increment was missing. Let
me double check that the optimization level was > 0.