On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 09:20:49PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 11:52:36PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> > - unsigned f_mode = file->f_mode;
> > + unsigned int f_mode = file->f_mode;
>
> This changes nothing; unsigned and unsigned int are exactly the same.
> fmode_t isn't, from sparse POV, and that's what you want to use here.
True. I get messed with this warning. Please see updated below.
---
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: fs, proc: Fix sparse warning in tid_fd_revalidate
The following warnings have been caught
| + fs/proc/fd.c:87:55: sparse: incorrect type in initializer (different base types)
| fs/proc/fd.c:87:55: expected unsigned int [unsigned] f_mode
| fs/proc/fd.c:87:55: got restricted fmode_t [usertype] f_mode
| + fs/proc/fd.c:105:54: sparse: restricted fmode_t degrades to integer
| fs/proc/fd.c:107:54: sparse: restricted fmode_t degrades to integer
make f_mode and i_mode declared with proper types.
Reported-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@xxxxxxxxxx>
CC: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/proc/fd.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.git/fs/proc/fd.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.git.orig/fs/proc/fd.c
+++ linux-2.6.git/fs/proc/fd.c
@@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ static int tid_fd_revalidate(struct dent
rcu_read_lock();
file = fcheck_files(files, fd);
if (file) {
- unsigned f_mode = file->f_mode;
+ fmode_t f_mode = file->f_mode;
rcu_read_unlock();
put_files_struct(files);
@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ static int tid_fd_revalidate(struct dent
}
if (S_ISLNK(inode->i_mode)) {
- unsigned i_mode = S_IFLNK;
+ umode_t i_mode = S_IFLNK;
if (f_mode & FMODE_READ)
i_mode |= S_IRUSR | S_IXUSR;
if (f_mode & FMODE_WRITE)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
