On 11/2/22 8:50 PM, Xinghui Li wrote: > > > ?? 2022/11/2 22:19??Jens Axboe?<axboe@xxxxxxxxx> ??: > >> On 11/2/22 2:25 AM, korantwork@xxxxxxxxx wrote: >> > From: Xinghui Li <korantli@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> > >> > Fixs two error: >> > >> > "ERROR: do not use assignment in if condition >> > 130: FILE: io_uring/net.c:130: >> > + if (!(issue_flags & IO_URING_F_UNLOCKED) && >> > >> > ERROR: do not use assignment in if condition >> > 599: FILE: io_uring/poll.c:599: >> > + } else if (!(issue_flags & IO_URING_F_UNLOCKED) &&" >> > reported by checkpatch.pl in net.c and poll.c . >> >> I'm not super excited about this patch as the previous one >> wasn't even compiled? Did you test this one, compile and runtime? >> > > First of all, I'm really really really SORRY for the last stupid > warning and my careless. But I did make kernel and install it in my > device. Also, I did the fio test with polling. However, there is no > warning be reported by 'make' command. But when I check the patch code > with 'smatch', I did find that warning. I realized how stupid that > mistake was.... So, in addition to compiling and installing this > kernel, I also checked the code using the static analysis tool this > time. There is no new error or warning. > " > make -j64 CHECK="~/workspace/smatch/smatch" C=1 > DESCEND objtool > CALL scripts/checksyscalls.sh > CC io_uring/net.o > CC io_uring/poll.o > CHECK io_uring/poll.c > io_uring/poll.c: note: in included file (through io_uring/io_uring.h): > io_uring/slist.h:138:29: warning: no newline at end of file > CHECK io_uring/net.c > io_uring/poll.c: note: in included file (through include/trace/events/io_uring.h): > ./include/linux/io_uring_types.h:151:37: warning: array of flexible structures > io_uring/net.c: note: in included file (through io_uring/io_uring.h): > io_uring/slist.h:138:29: warning: no newline at end of file > io_uring/net.c: note: in included file (through io_uring/io_uring.h): > ./include/linux/io_uring_types.h:151:37: warning: array of flexible structures > ... > BUILD arch/x86/boot/bzImage > Kernel: arch/x86/boot/bzImage is ready (#10) > " > > Again, I am ashamed of the previous mistake. And I totally understand > if you reject this one. All good, thanks for doing the due diligence this time around for v2. I'll get it applied for 6.2, thanks. -- Jens Axboe
