Re: [PATCH] kernel/params.c: make use of unused but set variable

Hi Tejun, On Jun 10, 2015, at 7:54 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hey, Louis. > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 11:05:21AM -0600, Louis Langholtz wrote: >> The underlying code for sysfs_create_file does call WARN to warn about >> any errors. So it's not like the code is total

Re: [PATCH] kernel/params.c: make use of unused but set variable

On Jun 7, 2015, at 6:58 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > On Sun, Jun 07, 2015 at 05:17:20PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> At most, it could be a "WARN_ON_ONCE()". Maybe even just silently >> ignore the error. But BUG_ON()? Hell no. > > Yeah, WARN_ON_ONCE() is the right one... > > -- > tejun On furthe

Re: [PATCH] kernel/params.c: make use of unused but set variable

On Jun 7, 2015, at 6:17 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 5:00 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: >> On Sun, Jun 07, 2015 at 05:54:30PM -0600, Louis Langholtz wrote: >>> @@ -853,6 +853,7 @@ static void __init version_sysfs_builtin(void) >>> mk =

[PATCH v2] kernel/params.c: make use of unused but set variable

;s suggestion. This eliminates the warning, satisfies the required check, and warns if sysfs_create_file actually ever fails (something that Rusty says should never happen when this code runs). Signed-off-by: Louis Langholtz --- diff --git a/kernel/params.c b/kernel/params.c index a22d6a7..49406f

[PATCH] kernel/params.c: make use of unused but set variable

uggestion. This eliminates the warning, satisfies the required check, and fails-fast with notice if sysfs_create_file actually ever fails (something that Rusty says should never happen when this code runs). Signed-off-by: Louis Langholtz --- diff --git a/kernel/params.c b/kernel/params.c index a22d6a

Re: kernel/params.c: 'err' variable "set but not used" and perhaps should be?

On Jun 1, 2015, at 7:32 PM, Rusty Russell wrote: > Louis Langholtz writes: >> I get a compiler warning (on compiling the linux kernel) about the 'err' >> variable being "set but not used" in the version_sysfs_builtin() function >> of kernel/params.c (at

Re: [PATCH] include/linux: avoid narrowing length parameter values

On May 18, 2015, at 9:56 AM, Al Viro wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 09:33:10AM -0600, Louis Langholtz wrote: >> memcpy_from_msg() and memcpy_to_msg() functions previously called >> memcpy_fromiovec() and memcpy_toiovec() functions respectively. The >> memcpy_fromiovec

[PATCH] include/linux: avoid narrowing length parameter values

parameter of type size_t. This also avoids a potential for data narrowing. Signed-off-by: Louis Langholtz -- diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h index 45e0aa6..ee590fb 100644 --- a/include/linux/skbuff.h +++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h @@ -2708,12 +2708,12 @@ int

Re: [tip:x86/build] x86/build: Remove -Wno-sign-compare

On May 13, 2015, at 4:22 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: > >> On Tue, 12 May 2015 10:44:15 +0200, Ingo Molnar said: >> >>> ... >>> Before I pushed out this -Wno-sign-compare change I made sure there >>> are no extra warnings generated on the 8 key configs I monitor >>

[PATCH] x86: eliminate comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions

Eliminates multiple compiler warnings when the -Wno-sign-compare option is removed from the x86 Makefile (an option that is documented as a "Workaround for a gcc prelease that unfortunately was shipped in a suse release"). Signed-off-by: Louis Langholtz --- arch/x86/include/asm/uac

Re: [PATCH 0/4] int to bool conversion

While it may not be productive to perturb seemingly working code (as Rafael argues), it may also not be productive to have decreased code readability (as Quentin suggests). Personally I prefer readability enhancements over worrying about possibly breaking working code. I don't want to start a flam

[PATCH] kernel: avoid overflow in cmp_range

Avoid overflow possibility. Signed-off-by: Louis Langholtz --- diff --git a/kernel/range.c b/kernel/range.c index 322ea8e..06d9ee7 100644 --- a/kernel/range.c +++ b/kernel/range.c @@ -113,12 +113,16 @@ static int cmp_range(const void *x1, const void *x2) { const struct range *r1 = x1

[PATCH 3.18] kernel: avoid overflow in cmp_range()

Avoid overflow possibility. Signed-off-by: Louis Langholtz --- diff --git a/kernel/range.c b/kernel/range.c index 322ea8e..06d9ee7 100644 --- a/kernel/range.c +++ b/kernel/range.c @@ -113,12 +113,16 @@ static int cmp_range(const void *x1, const void *x2) { const struct range *r1 = x1

[PATCH 3.18 v2] kernel: avoid possible overflow in range's cmp_range()

Avoid overflow possibility. Signed-off-by: Louis Langholtz --- diff --git a/kernel/range.c b/kernel/range.c index 322ea8e..06d9ee7 100644 --- a/kernel/range.c +++ b/kernel/range.c @@ -113,12 +113,16 @@ static int cmp_range(const void *x1, const void *x2) { const struct range *r1 = x1

PATCH: avoid possible integer overflow with cmp_range() in kernel/range.c

The cmp_range function (in kernel/range.c) is returning the difference between two s64 values (actually coming from u64 typed variables) in an int which can overflow (depending on the size of int). This function is used as a compare function for linux's sort function (in lib/sort.c). Linux's sor