On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 04:09:03PM -0300, Marcos Paulo de Souza wrote: > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:31:14AM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > 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? > > I don't know, it's my first sparse patch, so I tried to fix this > warning. > > > > > You also have a typo in your subject :( > > Sorry, didn't noticed yesterday :( > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Marcos Paulo de Souza <marcos.souza....@gmail.com> > > > --- > > > > > > 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? > > I didn't tested, it just removed the warning. Is this a false positive?
I don't know, it's up to you to prove to me that you know this change is correct. You have to justify your changes, and "because checkpatch.pl complained" isn't a valid justification for something like this :) thanks, greg k-h
