All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/timer.c: use 'u64' instead of 's64' to avoid compiler's warning
@ 2014-05-21  0:19 ` Chen Gang
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Chen Gang @ 2014-05-21  0:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dccp

'dccp_timestamp_seed' is initialized once by ktime_get_real() in
dccp_timestamping_init(). It is always less than ktime_get_real()
in dccp_timestamp().

Then, ktime_us_delta() in dccp_timestamp() will always return positive
number. So can use manual type cast to let compiler and do_div() know
about it to avoid warning.

The related warning (with allmodconfig under unicore32):

    CC [M]  net/dccp/timer.o
  net/dccp/timer.c: In function ‘dccp_timestamp’:
  net/dccp/timer.c:285: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast


Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com>
---
 net/dccp/timer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/net/dccp/timer.c b/net/dccp/timer.c
index 16f0b22..1cd46a3 100644
--- a/net/dccp/timer.c
+++ b/net/dccp/timer.c
@@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ static ktime_t dccp_timestamp_seed;
  */
 u32 dccp_timestamp(void)
 {
-	s64 delta = ktime_us_delta(ktime_get_real(), dccp_timestamp_seed);
+	u64 delta = (u64)ktime_us_delta(ktime_get_real(), dccp_timestamp_seed);
 
 	do_div(delta, 10);
 	return delta;
-- 
1.9.2.459.g68773ac

^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* 回复： [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/timer.c: use 'u
  2014-05-21  0:19 ` Chen Gang
@ 2014-05-22  0:26 ` 管雪涛
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: 管雪涛 @ 2014-05-22  0:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dccp


----- Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com> 写道：
> 'dccp_timestamp_seed' is initialized once by ktime_get_real() in
> dccp_timestamping_init(). It is always less than ktime_get_real()
> in dccp_timestamp().
> 
> Then, ktime_us_delta() in dccp_timestamp() will always return positive
> number. So can use manual type cast to let compiler and do_div() know
> about it to avoid warning.
> 
> The related warning (with allmodconfig under unicore32):
> 
>     CC [M]  net/dccp/timer.o
>   net/dccp/timer.c: In function ‘dccp_timestamp’:
>   net/dccp/timer.c:285: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast
> 
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com>
> ---
>  net/dccp/timer.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/dccp/timer.c b/net/dccp/timer.c
> index 16f0b22..1cd46a3 100644
> --- a/net/dccp/timer.c
> +++ b/net/dccp/timer.c
> @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ static ktime_t dccp_timestamp_seed;
>   */
>  u32 dccp_timestamp(void)
>  {
> -	s64 delta = ktime_us_delta(ktime_get_real(), dccp_timestamp_seed);
> +	u64 delta = (u64)ktime_us_delta(ktime_get_real(), dccp_timestamp_seed);

Do you assume that delta should be very small?
Otherwise, return value will be different if data type is changed.

>  
>  	do_div(delta, 10);
>  	return delta;
> -- 
> 1.9.2.459.g68773ac

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: 回复： [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/ =?UTF-8?B?dGltZXIuYzogdXNlICd1N
  2014-05-22  0:26 ` 回复： [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/timer.c: use 'u64' instead of 's64' to avoid compiler's warning 管雪涛
@ 2014-05-22  1:01 ` Chen Gang
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Chen Gang @ 2014-05-22  1:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dccp

On 05/22/2014 08:26 AM, 管雪涛 wrote:
> 
> ----- Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com> 写道：
>> 'dccp_timestamp_seed' is initialized once by ktime_get_real() in
>> dccp_timestamping_init(). It is always less than ktime_get_real()
>> in dccp_timestamp().
>>
>> Then, ktime_us_delta() in dccp_timestamp() will always return positive
>> number. So can use manual type cast to let compiler and do_div() know
>> about it to avoid warning.
>>
>> The related warning (with allmodconfig under unicore32):
>>
>>     CC [M]  net/dccp/timer.o
>>   net/dccp/timer.c: In function ‘dccp_timestamp’:
>>   net/dccp/timer.c:285: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast
>>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  net/dccp/timer.c | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/dccp/timer.c b/net/dccp/timer.c
>> index 16f0b22..1cd46a3 100644
>> --- a/net/dccp/timer.c
>> +++ b/net/dccp/timer.c
>> @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ static ktime_t dccp_timestamp_seed;
>>   */
>>  u32 dccp_timestamp(void)
>>  {
>> -	s64 delta = ktime_us_delta(ktime_get_real(), dccp_timestamp_seed);
>> +	u64 delta = (u64)ktime_us_delta(ktime_get_real(), dccp_timestamp_seed);
> 
> Do you assume that delta should be very small?
> Otherwise, return value will be different if data type is changed.
> 

'u64' is a very very large number. after calculation, if it is based on
nano second (although I am not quite sure whether it is based on it).

        a hour,            3,600,000,000,000ns
        a day,            90,000,000,000,000ns
        a year,       50,000,000,000,000,000ns
        10 years,    500,000,000,000,000,000ns
        100 years, 5,000,000,000,000,000,000ns
        4G * 4G = 16,000,000,000,000,000,000ns

So we can assume it will never overflow for 'u64'.


Thanks.
-- 
Chen Gang

Open, share, and attitude like air, water, and life which God blessed

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* 回复： Re: 回复： [PATCH linux- =
  2014-05-22  1:01 ` 回复： [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/timer.c: use 'u64' instead of 's64' to avoid compiler's warning Chen Gang
@ 2014-05-22  1:06 ` 管雪涛
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: 管雪涛 @ 2014-05-22  1:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dccp


----- Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com> 写道：
> On 05/22/2014 08:26 AM, 管雪涛 wrote:
> > 
> > ----- Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com> 写道：
> >> 'dccp_timestamp_seed' is initialized once by ktime_get_real() in
> >> dccp_timestamping_init(). It is always less than ktime_get_real()
> >> in dccp_timestamp().
> >>
> >> Then, ktime_us_delta() in dccp_timestamp() will always return positive
> >> number. So can use manual type cast to let compiler and do_div() know
> >> about it to avoid warning.
> >>
> >> The related warning (with allmodconfig under unicore32):
> >>
> >>     CC [M]  net/dccp/timer.o
> >>   net/dccp/timer.c: In function ‘dccp_timestamp’:
> >>   net/dccp/timer.c:285: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast
> >>
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com>
> >> ---
> >>  net/dccp/timer.c | 2 +-
> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/net/dccp/timer.c b/net/dccp/timer.c
> >> index 16f0b22..1cd46a3 100644
> >> --- a/net/dccp/timer.c
> >> +++ b/net/dccp/timer.c
> >> @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ static ktime_t dccp_timestamp_seed;
> >>   */
> >>  u32 dccp_timestamp(void)
> >>  {
> >> -	s64 delta = ktime_us_delta(ktime_get_real(), dccp_timestamp_seed);
> >> +	u64 delta = (u64)ktime_us_delta(ktime_get_real(), dccp_timestamp_seed);
> > 
> > Do you assume that delta should be very small?
> > Otherwise, return value will be different if data type is changed.
> > 
> 
> 'u64' is a very very large number. after calculation, if it is based on
> nano second (although I am not quite sure whether it is based on it).
> 
>         a hour,            3,600,000,000,000ns
>         a day,            90,000,000,000,000ns
>         a year,       50,000,000,000,000,000ns
>         10 years,    500,000,000,000,000,000ns
>         100 years, 5,000,000,000,000,000,000ns
>         4G * 4G = 16,000,000,000,000,000,000ns
> 
> So we can assume it will never overflow for 'u64'.

However, return value of dccp_timestamp function is u32.

> 
> 
> Thanks.
> -- 
> Chen Gang
> 
> Open, share, and attitude like air, water, and life which God blessed

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: 回复： Re: 回复： [PATCH linux-n =?UTF-8?B?ZXh0XSBuZXQvZGNjcC90a
  2014-05-22  1:06 ` 回复： Re: 回复： [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/timer.c: use 'u64' instead of 's64' to avoid compiler's warning 管雪涛
@ 2014-05-22  1:14 ` Chen Gang
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Chen Gang @ 2014-05-22  1:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dccp



On 05/22/2014 09:06 AM, 管雪涛 wrote:
> 
> ----- Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com> 写道：
>> On 05/22/2014 08:26 AM, 管雪涛 wrote:
>>>
>>> ----- Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com> 写道：
>>>> 'dccp_timestamp_seed' is initialized once by ktime_get_real() in
>>>> dccp_timestamping_init(). It is always less than ktime_get_real()
>>>> in dccp_timestamp().
>>>>
>>>> Then, ktime_us_delta() in dccp_timestamp() will always return positive
>>>> number. So can use manual type cast to let compiler and do_div() know
>>>> about it to avoid warning.
>>>>
>>>> The related warning (with allmodconfig under unicore32):
>>>>
>>>>     CC [M]  net/dccp/timer.o
>>>>   net/dccp/timer.c: In function ‘dccp_timestamp’:
>>>>   net/dccp/timer.c:285: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  net/dccp/timer.c | 2 +-
>>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/net/dccp/timer.c b/net/dccp/timer.c
>>>> index 16f0b22..1cd46a3 100644
>>>> --- a/net/dccp/timer.c
>>>> +++ b/net/dccp/timer.c
>>>> @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ static ktime_t dccp_timestamp_seed;
>>>>   */
>>>>  u32 dccp_timestamp(void)
>>>>  {
>>>> -	s64 delta = ktime_us_delta(ktime_get_real(), dccp_timestamp_seed);
>>>> +	u64 delta = (u64)ktime_us_delta(ktime_get_real(), dccp_timestamp_seed);
>>>
>>> Do you assume that delta should be very small?
>>> Otherwise, return value will be different if data type is changed.
>>>
>>
>> 'u64' is a very very large number. after calculation, if it is based on
>> nano second (although I am not quite sure whether it is based on it).
>>
>>         a hour,            3,600,000,000,000ns
>>         a day,            90,000,000,000,000ns
>>         a year,       50,000,000,000,000,000ns
>>         10 years,    500,000,000,000,000,000ns
>>         100 years, 5,000,000,000,000,000,000ns
>>         4G * 4G = 16,000,000,000,000,000,000ns
>>
>> So we can assume it will never overflow for 'u64'.
> 
> However, return value of dccp_timestamp function is u32.
> 

After check the function comments.

/**
 * dccp_timestamp  -  10s of microseconds time source
 * Returns the number of 10s of microseconds since loading DCCP. This is native
 * DCCP time difference format (RFC 4340, sec. 13).
 * Please note: This will wrap around about circa every 11.9 hours.
 */

So, it is still acceptable, although it is truncated into 'u32' before return.

>>
>>
>> Thanks.
>> -- 
>> Chen Gang
>>
>> Open, share, and attitude like air, water, and life which God blessed

-- 
Chen Gang

Open, share, and attitude like air, water, and life which God blessed

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: 回复： Re: [PATCH linux-next] net/d =?UTF-8?B?Y2NwL3RpbWVyLmM6IHVzZ
  2014-05-22 23:58   ` 回复： Re: [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/timer.c: use 'u64' instead of 's64' to avoid compiler's warning 管雪涛
@ 2014-05-23  1:43 ` Chen Gang
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Chen Gang @ 2014-05-23  1:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dccp

On 05/23/2014 07:58 AM, 管雪涛 wrote:
> 
> ----- David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> 写道：
>> From: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com>
>> Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 08:19:34 +0800
>>
>>> 'dccp_timestamp_seed' is initialized once by ktime_get_real() in
>>> dccp_timestamping_init(). It is always less than ktime_get_real()
>>> in dccp_timestamp().
>>>
>>> Then, ktime_us_delta() in dccp_timestamp() will always return positive
>>> number. So can use manual type cast to let compiler and do_div() know
>>> about it to avoid warning.
>>>
>>> The related warning (with allmodconfig under unicore32):
>>>
>>>     CC [M]  net/dccp/timer.o
>>>   net/dccp/timer.c: In function ‘dccp_timestamp’:
>>>   net/dccp/timer.c:285: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast
>>>
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen.5i5j@gmail.com>
>>
>> Applied to net-next, thanks.
>>

Thank you for your work.

>> But that type check in include/asm-generic/div64.h is bogus, it should
>> be checking sizeof(X) = 8 rather than the type thing, it just wants to
>> make sure that the value is 64-bit regardless of it's signedness.
>>
>> The arch local implementations do not do this, and that's why very few
>> other people notice this warning.
> 
> Arch-dependent codes implement it with unsigned long long type.
> And, every warning should not be ignored.
> 

Yeah, we have to let do_div() no touch (especially for 32-bit machine,
which the highest bit is checked). The related code in
"include/asm-generic/div64.h":

 23 #if BITS_PER_LONG = 64
 24
 25 # define do_div(n,base) ({                                      \
 26         uint32_t __base = (base);                               \
 27         uint32_t __rem;                                         \
 28         __rem = ((uint64_t)(n)) % __base;                       \
 29         (n) = ((uint64_t)(n)) / __base;                         \
 30         __rem;                                                  \
 31  })
 32
 33 #elif BITS_PER_LONG = 32
 34
 35 extern uint32_t __div64_32(uint64_t *dividend, uint32_t divisor);
 36
 37 /* The unnecessary pointer compare is there
 38  * to check for type safety (n must be 64bit)
 39  */
 40 # define do_div(n,base) ({                              \
 41         uint32_t __base = (base);                       \
 42         uint32_t __rem;                                 \
 43         (void)(((typeof((n)) *)0) = ((uint64_t *)0));  \
 44         if (likely(((n) >> 32) = 0)) {                 \
 45                 __rem = (uint32_t)(n) % __base;         \
 46                 (n) = (uint32_t)(n) / __base;           \
 47         } else                                          \
 48                 __rem = __div64_32(&(n), __base);       \
 49         __rem;                                          \
 50  })


And for division operation, architectures are signed/unsigned
sensitive, e.g. div_u64() and div_s64(), they are different.


Thanks.
-- 
Chen Gang

Open, share, and attitude like air, water, and life which God blessed

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 17+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-05-23  1:43 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-05-21  0:19 [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/timer.c: use 'u64' instead of 's64' to avoid compiler's warning Chen Gang
2014-05-21  0:19 ` Chen Gang
2014-05-22 19:33 ` David Miller
2014-05-22 19:33   ` David Miller
2014-05-22 19:33   ` David Miller
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-05-22  0:26 回复： [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/timer.c: use 'u 管雪涛
2014-05-22  0:26 ` 回复： [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/timer.c: use 'u64' instead of 's64' to avoid compiler's warning 管雪涛
2014-05-22  1:01 回复： [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/ =?UTF-8?B?dGltZXIuYzogdXNlICd1N Chen Gang
2014-05-22  1:01 ` 回复： [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/timer.c: use 'u64' instead of 's64' to avoid compiler's warning Chen Gang
2014-05-22  1:06 回复： Re: 回复： [PATCH linux- = 管雪涛
2014-05-22  1:06 ` 回复： Re: 回复： [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/timer.c: use 'u64' instead of 's64' to avoid compiler's warning 管雪涛
2014-05-22 23:58 ` 回复： Re: [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/timer.c: use 管雪涛
2014-05-22 23:58   ` 回复： Re: [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/timer.c: use 'u64' instead of 's64' to avoid compiler's warning 管雪涛
2014-05-22  1:14 回复： Re: 回复： [PATCH linux-n =?UTF-8?B?ZXh0XSBuZXQvZGNjcC90a Chen Gang
2014-05-22  1:14 ` 回复： Re: 回复： [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/timer.c: use 'u64' instead of 's64' to avoid compiler's warning Chen Gang
2014-05-23  1:43 回复： Re: [PATCH linux-next] net/d =?UTF-8?B?Y2NwL3RpbWVyLmM6IHVzZ Chen Gang
2014-05-23  1:43 ` 回复： Re: [PATCH linux-next] net/dccp/timer.c: use 'u64' instead of 's64' to avoid compiler's warning Chen Gang

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.