On Sat, Aug 09, 2014 at 07:07:53PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> drivers/mtd/nand/nand_timings.c:45: warning: integer constant is too large
> for ‘long’ type
On what compiler / static analyzer?
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <ge...@linux-m68k.org>
> ---
> drivers/mtd/nand/nand_timings.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_timings.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_timings.c
> index 8b36253420fa..e81470a8ac67 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_timings.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_timings.c
> @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ static const struct nand_sdr_timings onfi_sdr_timings[] = {
> .tRHZ_max = 200000,
> .tRLOH_min = 0,
> .tRP_min = 50000,
> - .tRST_max = 250000000000,
> + .tRST_max = 250000000000ULL,
See [1] and [2]. I'm pretty sure it is a bug in your tool to warn about
this. The C standard seems pretty clear that the large literal constant
is automatically promoted to a sufficiently large type, so AIUI there
should be no need for such a warning. A standards-compliant compiler
will do the right thing.
It really seems like this type of warning is only appropriate where a
smaller literal constant is immediately operated on such that it will
overflow. e.g.:
.tRST_max = 250 * 1000 * 1000 * 1000,
But this usually results in a different type of (correct) warning, like:
warning: integer overflow in expression [-Woverflow]
However, I could be convinced to apply this, if only to satisfy broken
tools and to avoid addressing this question over and over...
> .tWB_max = 200000,
> .tRR_min = 40000,
> .tWC_min = 100000,
Brian
[1] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2014-July/054750.html
[2] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-April/252494.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
