From: Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>
To: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@tilera.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch/tile: fix futex sanitization definition/prototype mismatch
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 19:46:06 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D880D6E.9000501@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201103191553.p2JFrWG9010986@farm-0023.internal.tilera.com>
On 03/19/2011 08:45 AM, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> Commit 8d7718aa082aaf30a0b4989e1f04858952f941bc changed "int"
> to "u32" in the prototypes but not the definition.
> I missed this when I saw the patch go by on LKML.
>
> We cast "u32 *" to "int *" since we are tying into the underlying
> atomics framework, and atomic_t uses int as its value type.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Metcalf<cmetcalf@tilera.com>
Should we have caught this with a compiler warning (mismatch definition
and prototype) ? If not, why not?
Compile and boot tested?
Acked-by: Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> arch/tile/lib/atomic_32.c | 12 ++++++------
> 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/tile/lib/atomic_32.c b/arch/tile/lib/atomic_32.c
> index f02040d..4657021 100644
> --- a/arch/tile/lib/atomic_32.c
> +++ b/arch/tile/lib/atomic_32.c
> @@ -202,32 +202,32 @@ static inline int *__futex_setup(int __user *v)
> return __atomic_hashed_lock((int __force *)v);
> }
>
> -struct __get_user futex_set(int __user *v, int i)
> +struct __get_user futex_set(u32 __user *v, int i)
> {
> return __atomic_xchg((int __force *)v, __futex_setup(v), i);
> }
>
> -struct __get_user futex_add(int __user *v, int n)
> +struct __get_user futex_add(u32 __user *v, int n)
> {
> return __atomic_xchg_add((int __force *)v, __futex_setup(v), n);
> }
>
> -struct __get_user futex_or(int __user *v, int n)
> +struct __get_user futex_or(u32 __user *v, int n)
> {
> return __atomic_or((int __force *)v, __futex_setup(v), n);
> }
>
> -struct __get_user futex_andn(int __user *v, int n)
> +struct __get_user futex_andn(u32 __user *v, int n)
> {
> return __atomic_andn((int __force *)v, __futex_setup(v), n);
> }
>
> -struct __get_user futex_xor(int __user *v, int n)
> +struct __get_user futex_xor(u32 __user *v, int n)
> {
> return __atomic_xor((int __force *)v, __futex_setup(v), n);
> }
>
> -struct __get_user futex_cmpxchg(int __user *v, int o, int n)
> +struct __get_user futex_cmpxchg(u32 __user *v, int o, int n)
> {
> return __atomic_cmpxchg((int __force *)v, __futex_setup(v), o, n);
> }
--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-22 2:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-19 15:45 [PATCH] arch/tile: fix futex sanitization definition/prototype mismatch Chris Metcalf
2011-03-20 3:52 ` Michel Lespinasse
2011-03-22 2:46 ` Darren Hart [this message]
2011-03-22 13:43 ` Chris Metcalf
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=4D880D6E.9000501@linux.intel.com \
--to=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=cmetcalf@tilera.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=walken@google.com \
/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.