On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 07:21:14PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 06:32:14PM +0900, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > - int hwcache_align, object_size, objs_per_slab;
> > - int sanity_checks, slab_size, store_user, trace;
> > + int hwcache_align, objs_per_slab;
> > + int sanity_checks, store_user, trace;
> > int order, poison, reclaim_account, red_zone;
> > + unsigned int object_size, slab_size;
>
> Surely hwcache_align and objs_per_slab can't be negative either?
> Nor the other three. So maybe convert all seven of these variables to
> unsigned int?
>
Fair enough, I update the patch.
Thanks for the comment.
- Naoya
---
>From 25e19ce711cdb4aa5c4f1a04784017af48616e5f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horigu...@ah.jp.nec.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 18:22:40 +0900
Subject: [PATCH v2] tools/vm/slabinfo.c: fix sign-compare warning
Currently we get the following compiler warning:
slabinfo.c:854:22: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer
expressions [-Wsign-compare]
if (s->object_size < min_objsize)
^
due to the mismatch of signed/unsigned comparison. ->object_size and
->slab_size are never expected to be negative, so let's define them
as unsigned int.
Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horigu...@ah.jp.nec.com>
---
tools/vm/slabinfo.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/vm/slabinfo.c b/tools/vm/slabinfo.c
index f82c2eaa859d..334b16db0ebb 100644
--- a/tools/vm/slabinfo.c
+++ b/tools/vm/slabinfo.c
@@ -30,8 +30,8 @@ struct slabinfo {
int alias;
int refs;
int aliases, align, cache_dma, cpu_slabs, destroy_by_rcu;
- int hwcache_align, object_size, objs_per_slab;
- int sanity_checks, slab_size, store_user, trace;
+ unsigned int hwcache_align, object_size, objs_per_slab;
+ unsigned int sanity_checks, slab_size, store_user, trace;
int order, poison, reclaim_account, red_zone;
unsigned long partial, objects, slabs, objects_partial, objects_total;
unsigned long alloc_fastpath, alloc_slowpath;
--
2.7.4
