From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: mmotm 2013-06-27-16-36 uploaded (wait event common) Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 22:51:39 -0700 Message-ID: <20130627225139.798e7b00.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20130627233733.BAEB131C3BE@corp2gmr1-1.hot.corp.google.com> <51CD1F81.4040202@infradead.org> Reply-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <51CD1F81.4040202@infradead.org> Sender: mm-commits-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Randy Dunlap Cc: mm-commits@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 22:30:41 -0700 Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 06/27/13 16:37, akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote: > > The mm-of-the-moment snapshot 2013-06-27-16-36 has been uploaded to > > > > http://www.ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/ > > > > mmotm-readme.txt says > > > > README for mm-of-the-moment: > > > > http://www.ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/ > > > > My builds are littered with hundreds of warnings like this one: > > drivers/tty/tty_ioctl.c:220:6: warning: the omitted middle operand in ?: will always be 'true', suggest explicit middle operand [-Wparentheses] > > I guess due to this line from wait_event_common(): > > + __ret = __wait_no_timeout(tout) ?: (tout) ?: 1; > Ah, sorry, I missed that. Had I noticed it, I would have spat it back on taste grounds alone, it being unfit for human consumption. Something like this? --- a/include/linux/wait.h~wait-introduce-wait_event_commonwq-condition-state-timeout-fix +++ a/include/linux/wait.h @@ -196,7 +196,11 @@ wait_queue_head_t *bit_waitqueue(void *, for (;;) { \ prepare_to_wait(&wq, &__wait, state); \ if (condition) { \ - __ret = __wait_no_timeout(tout) ?: __tout ?: 1; \ + __ret = __wait_no_timeout(tout); \ + if (!__ret) \ + __ret = __tout; \ + if (!__ret) \ + __ret = 1; \ break; \ } \ \