From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754322AbdC2Hbu (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2017 03:31:50 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:53790 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754099AbdC2Hbs (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Mar 2017 03:31:48 -0400 Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 09:31:14 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Marcos Paulo de Souza Cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, Doug Oucharek , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Oleg Drokin , Al Viro , Andreas Dilger , lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: lusten: conrpc.c: fix different address space sparse warning Message-ID: <20170329073114.GA8459@kroah.com> References: <20170329021409.24537-1-marcos.souza.org@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170329021409.24537-1-marcos.souza.org@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.0 (2017-02-23) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 11:14:06PM -0300, Marcos Paulo de Souza wrote: > head_up parameter is marked with __user attribute, tmp is filled > by a copy_from_user from next, that is also marked as __user, so > tmp.next needs to be "casted" as __user to make sparse happy. But is it the correct change? You also have a typo in your subject :( > Signed-off-by: Marcos Paulo de Souza > --- > > this is mt first patch addressing an issue of sparse, so let me know > if I misunderstood the error message > > drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/selftest/conrpc.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/selftest/conrpc.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/selftest/conrpc.c > index c6a683b..fb7ad74 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/selftest/conrpc.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/selftest/conrpc.c > @@ -487,7 +487,7 @@ lstcon_rpc_trans_interpreter(struct lstcon_rpc_trans *trans, > sizeof(struct list_head))) > return -EFAULT; > > - if (tmp.next == head_up) > + if ((struct list_head __user *)tmp.next == head_up) Aer you sure this is correct? __user changes for lustre is not trivial... How did you test this? thanks, greg k-h