Re: lockdep: testing '0' where '\0' intended?

2013-10-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 01:06:03AM +0200, Roel Kluin wrote: > Not entirely sure about the assembly part, but shouldn't it... > > Test for the nul character rather than the '0' (== 0x30), in the > __get_user_unknown() case. > > Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin > --- > diff --git

Re: lockdep: testing '0' where '\0' intended?

2013-10-12 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 01:06:03AM +0200, Roel Kluin wrote: Not entirely sure about the assembly part, but shouldn't it... Test for the nul character rather than the '0' (== 0x30), in the __get_user_unknown() case. Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin roel.kl...@gmail.com --- diff --git

lockdep: testing '0' where '\0' intended?

2013-10-11 Thread Roel Kluin
Not entirely sure about the assembly part, but shouldn't it... Test for the nul character rather than the '0' (== 0x30), in the __get_user_unknown() case. Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin --- diff --git a/kernel/lockdep_proc.c b/kernel/lockdep_proc.c index b2c71c5..71b3aba 100644 ---

lockdep: testing '0' where '\0' intended?

2013-10-11 Thread Roel Kluin
Not entirely sure about the assembly part, but shouldn't it... Test for the nul character rather than the '0' (== 0x30), in the __get_user_unknown() case. Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin roel.kl...@gmail.com --- diff --git a/kernel/lockdep_proc.c b/kernel/lockdep_proc.c index b2c71c5..71b3aba