From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org, Juergen Beisert <jbe@pengutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] linux/kernel.h: Fix DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST with unsigned divisors
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 12:48:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20121220124820.0069aa66@endymion.delvare> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121219230144.GB26863@roeck-us.net>
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 15:01:44 -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 11:21:15PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > Hi Guenter,
> >
> > On Wed, 19 Dec 2012 06:40:15 -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > > Commit 263a523 fixes a warning seen with W=1 due to change in
> > > DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST. Unfortunately, the C compiler converts divide operations
> > > with unsigned divisors to unsigned, even if the dividend is signed and
> > > negative (for example, -10 / 5U = 858993457). The C standard says "If one
> > > operand has unsigned int type, the other operand is converted to unsigned
> > > int", so the compiler is not to blame.
> >
> > This is surprising to say the least. But if the C standard says so...
>
> Agreed, but it is how it is.
>
> > I wouldn't be surprised if there are bugs because of this in the kernel
> > and in other projects.
>
> Might easily be. This might make a good interview question - I suspect many
> if not most engineers would fail it. At least I would have until yesterday :).
Neither did I. And I'm not sure I'll remember it in one year from now.
> > (...)
> > Thinking a bit more about this... Documenting the non-working cases is
> > great, however I don't really expect all developers to pay attention. I
> > can also imagine variable types changing from signed to unsigned later,
> > and never thinking this can introduce a bug.
> >
> > So, is there nothing we can do to spot at least the second issue at
> > build time? For regular division there's nothing we can do (although I
> > don't understand why gcc doesn't warn...) but here we get the
> > opportunity to report the issue, let's take it.
> >
> > And given that the divisor is almost always a constant,
> > maybe we can check for negative divisors too, this would be safer and
> > the code size increase would probably be very small in practice.
> > Opinions?
>
> Agreed, though we should fix the problem now and think about reporting
> afterwards.
Yes, that's a good plan.
--
Jean Delvare
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-20 11:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-19 14:40 [PATCH v2] linux/kernel.h: Fix DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST with unsigned divisors Guenter Roeck
2012-12-19 21:47 ` Andrew Morton
2012-12-19 22:41 ` Guenter Roeck
2012-12-20 10:22 ` Jean Delvare
2012-12-20 10:30 ` Juergen Beisert
2012-12-20 11:00 ` Jean Delvare
2012-12-20 14:13 ` Guenter Roeck
2012-12-19 22:21 ` Jean Delvare
2012-12-19 23:01 ` Guenter Roeck
2012-12-20 11:48 ` Jean Delvare [this message]
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=20121220124820.0069aa66@endymion.delvare \
--to=khali@linux-fr.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jbe@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox