From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01CBEC433F5 for ; Sat, 7 May 2022 22:32:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1379158AbiEGWcy (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 May 2022 18:32:54 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51576 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230525AbiEGWcu (ORCPT ); Sat, 7 May 2022 18:32:50 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-x22f.google.com (mail-lj1-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::22f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1D60B1E for ; Sat, 7 May 2022 15:29:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x22f.google.com with SMTP id 16so13014343lju.13 for ; Sat, 07 May 2022 15:29:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=openvz-org.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=29mmpw9oHWZftwf6PSHqPToRdFpEollKDtx2EGQfLno=; b=5z6Um3Do2czICqz/SXtnSq5Zm4qqMWHDzuXyhdzax5Ql7L7Agly/lwrgTBpTNk0CHs 0G2qdeikWTJQhuO+pOZArQov36vAb2wXdXQoZcg6tD3PBv8KeLQSMlTQtRSMDBsrCo9y p5busCOoIw+btO/ZphTtwnEkCrQ6a7NnmpQ8lsTIUW6P/dDHlSV1XhaelaSMuoClt2Xv 9q6UFyFVEllJDZ0Gm2y8asHjRLHihFRqavCYxnYV19Tn/X++PW1eDbQPWVjjbpvJX8S7 /roRJnSvkNJUkLTBFpJAvzquJ1qQwNioJYecAw8csWpNTaWl1xod1BL9BetIyR4VqzJ3 MfQg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=29mmpw9oHWZftwf6PSHqPToRdFpEollKDtx2EGQfLno=; b=PsVjUmEytZcNR83NSO8TMy20qbAM2HKZxJSxSTEkzzhBhBtBy4nTZwxoMXyYVEcft0 UjpR6s0gkj3WDeEJdUkZR9NpEBG2C/ixYP+DzQCKE7blYzAYgQXDvsieOKqqpl6EEc55 /A0pIapTVxJWUYOsOQv9XFiyyk1fzydpupB+hdJZtFqx5SzlQ8nzFclC3k9gsOKMfbOA dK7rppozdnZnhRK8Ww8mMrK2q1DZyfcja9CIxjZpAD6rxlDZ1NuIJp1vN2LDVoutXoye sj0s2+PcfaoSPyVga7sWkyC+VeORuHc1j7w2d4VEVIctez29hqva6uwkPB8CGfsYzLy2 EYFg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5303E8RFXGAMRdzSG9YhvO5ZhJHH5GPsBVhKDm9Q1iNtP7lnFOif Wvta4iEsUff9YwnfagYxv2oaqQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxXTQV2ogqQz9qNuvLeWR+WTkQMh2Gl3I9Ro58yRsNlhwVkfX/KfJneP86+8zZtKtio+0cAow== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9944:0:b0:24f:1286:c318 with SMTP id r4-20020a2e9944000000b0024f1286c318mr6187060ljj.146.1651962540100; Sat, 07 May 2022 15:29:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.65] ([46.188.121.177]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p21-20020a05651212d500b0047255d211dbsm1271401lfg.266.2022.05.07.15.28.58 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 07 May 2022 15:28:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8b1cfefa-da7d-3376-cf04-1ff77dab8170@openvz.org> Date: Sun, 8 May 2022 01:28:58 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH mm] tracing: incorrect gfp_t conversion Content-Language: en-US To: Andrew Morton Cc: Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , kernel@openvz.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org References: <331d88fe-f4f7-657c-02a2-d977f15fbff6@openvz.org> <20220507123728.f20d977eba9fbb66bddee722@linux-foundation.org> From: Vasily Averin In-Reply-To: <20220507123728.f20d977eba9fbb66bddee722@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5/7/22 22:37, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Sat, 7 May 2022 22:02:05 +0300 Vasily Averin wrote: >> + {(__force unsigned long)GFP_KERNEL, "GFP_KERNEL"}, \ >> + {(__force unsigned long)GFP_NOFS, "GFP_NOFS"}, \ > > This got all repetitive, line-wrappy and ugly :( > > What do we think of something silly like this? > --- a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h~tracing-incorrect-gfp_t-conversion-fix > +++ a/include/trace/events/mmflags.h > @@ -13,53 +13,57 @@ > * Thus most bits set go first. > */ > > +#define FUL __force unsigned long > + > #define __def_gfpflag_names \ > - {(__force unsigned long)GFP_TRANSHUGE, "GFP_TRANSHUGE"}, \ > - {(__force unsigned long)GFP_TRANSHUGE_LIGHT, "GFP_TRANSHUGE_LIGHT"}, \ ... > + {(FUL)GFP_TRANSHUGE, "GFP_TRANSHUGE"}, \ > + {(FUL)GFP_TRANSHUGE_LIGHT, "GFP_TRANSHUGE_LIGHT"}, \ I think it's a good idea, and I regret it was your idea and not mine. Should I resend my patch with these changes or would you prefer to keep your patch as a separate one? Thank you, Vasily Averin