[PATCH] staging: lustre: mdc: use __FMODE_EXEC macro

[PATCH] staging: lustre: mdc: use __FMODE_EXEC macro

[Juston Li]

FMODE_EXEC is type fmode_t but is used in operations
with integers which leads to sparse warnings:
drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_lib.c:198:21: warning: restricted fmode_t degrades to integer
drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_locks.c:300:49: warning: restricted fmode_t degrades to integer

Fix by using __FMODE_EXEC macro defined in fs.h.

Note the same warnings occurs with other fmode flags
here but they don't have a corresponding int macro.

Signed-off-by: Juston Li <juston.h.li@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_lib.c   | 4 ++--
 drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_locks.c | 4 ++--
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_lib.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_lib.c
index e8732cc..34c9a86 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_lib.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_lib.c
@@ -194,8 +194,8 @@ static __u64 mds_pack_open_flags(__u64 flags, __u32 mode)
 		cr_flags |= MDS_OPEN_SYNC;
 	if (flags & O_DIRECTORY)
 		cr_flags |= MDS_OPEN_DIRECTORY;
-#ifdef FMODE_EXEC
-	if (flags & FMODE_EXEC)
+#ifdef __FMODE_EXEC
+	if (flags & __FMODE_EXEC)
 		cr_flags |= MDS_FMODE_EXEC;
 #endif
 	if (cl_is_lov_delay_create(flags))
diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_locks.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_locks.c
index b58147e..c05afa8 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_locks.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_locks.c
@@ -296,8 +296,8 @@ static struct ptlrpc_request *mdc_intent_open_pack(struct obd_export *exp,
 		} else {
 			if (it->it_flags & (FMODE_WRITE|MDS_OPEN_TRUNC))
 				mode = LCK_CW;
-#ifdef FMODE_EXEC
-			else if (it->it_flags & FMODE_EXEC)
+#ifdef __FMODE_EXEC
+			else if (it->it_flags & __FMODE_EXEC)
 				mode = LCK_PR;
 #endif
 			else
-- 
2.1.3

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: mdc: use __FMODE_EXEC macro

[Dan Carpenter]

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 02:23:48PM -0800, Juston Li wrote:
> FMODE_EXEC is type fmode_t but is used in operations
> with integers which leads to sparse warnings:
> drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_lib.c:198:21: warning: restricted fmode_t degrades to integer
> drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_locks.c:300:49: warning: restricted fmode_t degrades to integer
> 
> Fix by using __FMODE_EXEC macro defined in fs.h.
> 
> Note the same warnings occurs with other fmode flags
> here but they don't have a corresponding int macro.
> 

When are FMODE_EXEC and __FMODE_EXEC not defined?  I think they're
always defined.  I don't understand the point of these ifdefs.  I guess
maybe they are for compatability with obsolete kernels?

regards,
dan carpenter

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: mdc: use __FMODE_EXEC macro

[Juston]

On Tue, 2014-11-18 at 01:46 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 02:23:48PM -0800, Juston Li wrote:
> > FMODE_EXEC is type fmode_t but is used in operations
> > with integers which leads to sparse warnings:
> > drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_lib.c:198:21: warning: restricted fmode_t degrades to integer
> > drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_locks.c:300:49: warning: restricted fmode_t degrades to integer
> > 
> > Fix by using __FMODE_EXEC macro defined in fs.h.
> > 
> > Note the same warnings occurs with other fmode flags
> > here but they don't have a corresponding int macro.
> > 
> 
> When are FMODE_EXEC and __FMODE_EXEC not defined?  I think they're
> always defined.  I don't understand the point of these ifdefs.  I guess
> maybe they are for compatability with obsolete kernels?
> 
> regards,
> dan carpenter
> 
Seems to be the case. Looked at some old commits (2.6.17) and found
FMODE_EXEC was mainlined to allow lustre to be installed on a vanilla
kernel.
Since you pointed it out, if we are dealing with compatability with 
obselete kernels, __FMODE_EXEC was added later in 2.6.38. Wondering
if I should address the case where FMODE_EXEC is defined but 
__FMODE_EXEC isn't since I currently only check __FMODE_EXEC.

Regards,
Juston Li

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: mdc: use __FMODE_EXEC macro

[Greg KH]

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 04:23:08PM -0800, Juston wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-11-18 at 01:46 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 02:23:48PM -0800, Juston Li wrote:
> > > FMODE_EXEC is type fmode_t but is used in operations
> > > with integers which leads to sparse warnings:
> > > drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_lib.c:198:21: warning: restricted fmode_t degrades to integer
> > > drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/mdc/mdc_locks.c:300:49: warning: restricted fmode_t degrades to integer
> > > 
> > > Fix by using __FMODE_EXEC macro defined in fs.h.
> > > 
> > > Note the same warnings occurs with other fmode flags
> > > here but they don't have a corresponding int macro.
> > > 
> > 
> > When are FMODE_EXEC and __FMODE_EXEC not defined?  I think they're
> > always defined.  I don't understand the point of these ifdefs.  I guess
> > maybe they are for compatability with obsolete kernels?
> > 
> > regards,
> > dan carpenter
> > 
> Seems to be the case. Looked at some old commits (2.6.17) and found
> FMODE_EXEC was mainlined to allow lustre to be installed on a vanilla
> kernel.
> Since you pointed it out, if we are dealing with compatability with 
> obselete kernels, __FMODE_EXEC was added later in 2.6.38. Wondering
> if I should address the case where FMODE_EXEC is defined but 
> __FMODE_EXEC isn't since I currently only check __FMODE_EXEC.

Just fix it up to work the the current kernel version, no need to
support anything else in this codebase.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: mdc: use __FMODE_EXEC macro

[Dan Carpenter]

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 04:23:08PM -0800, Juston wrote:
> Seems to be the case. Looked at some old commits (2.6.17) and found
> FMODE_EXEC was mainlined to allow lustre to be installed on a vanilla
> kernel.

We actually only care about the most recent kernel.  I think you can
remove the ifdefs in this case.

regards,
dan carpenter