From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754618AbZJLIC1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Oct 2009 04:02:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754590AbZJLIC0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Oct 2009 04:02:26 -0400 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:37837 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754586AbZJLICX (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Oct 2009 04:02:23 -0400 Message-ID: <4AD2E258.9090706@kernel.org> Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 17:01:28 +0900 From: Tejun Heo User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mikael Pettersson CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.32-rc3] fix pcpu_embed_first_chunk() compile warnings References: <19151.3066.304514.621378@pilspetsen.it.uu.se> In-Reply-To: <19151.3066.304514.621378@pilspetsen.it.uu.se> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (hera.kernel.org [127.0.0.1]); Mon, 12 Oct 2009 08:01:31 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mikael Pettersson wrote: > Compiling 2.6.32-rc3 on i686 I get the following new warnings: > > mm/percpu.c: In function 'pcpu_embed_first_chunk': > mm/percpu.c:1873: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast > mm/percpu.c:1879: warning: format '%lx' expects type 'long unsigned int', but argument 2 has type 'size_t' > > They are caused by 6ea529a2037ce662fc6bfa572b46d47407d08805 > "make embedding first chunk allocator check vmalloc space size". > > The first warning is because max() is applied to one operand of > type 'size_t' and another of type 'unsigned long'. Fix: cast the > second one to 'size_t'. > > For the second warning: always use '%z' to format 'size_t' operands. > > Signed-off-by: Mikael Pettersson For some reason, I've been thinking this was linux-next specific and committed about the same patch there, commit 3cbeae2f, a while ago. The only difference was use of max_t() instead of size_t cast. I think max_t() is cleaner there and will cherry pick the patch from linux-next. Thanks. -- tejun