From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] PCI: set ->mask_pos correctly
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 20:57:01 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130430205701.GG5072@mwanda> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAErSpo64WyM=4c3WC8hy-xy2gNgWtkJVTqzawRU6d6=t6nxnoQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 10:45:35AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
> > The "+" operation has higher precedence than "?:" and ->msi_cap is
> > always non-zero here so the original statement is equivalent to:
> >
> > entry->mask_pos = PCI_MSI_MASK_64;
> >
> > Which wasn't the intent.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
>
> Ouch, my fault, sorry about that. Thanks for finding this. I put
> this in my for-linus branch and will try to get this in before
> v3.10-rc1.
>
> How did you find this? I guess MSI didn't work right on a device with
> 32-bit message address and per-vector masking?
>
Static analysis. I have a check that complains about every
condition like:
if (foo + bar) { ...
It has too many false positives to foist on the public though.
regards,
dan carpenter
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc: "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] PCI: set ->mask_pos correctly
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 23:57:01 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130430205701.GG5072@mwanda> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAErSpo64WyM=4c3WC8hy-xy2gNgWtkJVTqzawRU6d6=t6nxnoQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 10:45:35AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
> > The "+" operation has higher precedence than "?:" and ->msi_cap is
> > always non-zero here so the original statement is equivalent to:
> >
> > entry->mask_pos = PCI_MSI_MASK_64;
> >
> > Which wasn't the intent.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
>
> Ouch, my fault, sorry about that. Thanks for finding this. I put
> this in my for-linus branch and will try to get this in before
> v3.10-rc1.
>
> How did you find this? I guess MSI didn't work right on a device with
> 32-bit message address and per-vector masking?
>
Static analysis. I have a check that complains about every
condition like:
if (foo + bar) { ...
It has too many false positives to foist on the public though.
regards,
dan carpenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-30 20:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-30 7:44 [patch] PCI: set ->mask_pos correctly Dan Carpenter
2013-04-30 7:44 ` Dan Carpenter
2013-04-30 16:45 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-04-30 16:45 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-04-30 20:57 ` Dan Carpenter [this message]
2013-04-30 20:57 ` Dan Carpenter
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130430205701.GG5072@mwanda \
--to=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.