On Sat, Aug 25, 2018 at 07:21:14PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 06:32:14PM +0900, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > > - int hwcache_align, object_size, objs_per_slab; > > - int sanity_checks, slab_size, store_user, trace; > > + int hwcache_align, objs_per_slab; > > + int sanity_checks, store_user, trace; > > int order, poison, reclaim_account, red_zone; > > + unsigned int object_size, slab_size; > > Surely hwcache_align and objs_per_slab can't be negative either? > Nor the other three. So maybe convert all seven of these variables to > unsigned int? > Fair enough, I update the patch. Thanks for the comment. - Naoya --- >From 25e19ce711cdb4aa5c4f1a04784017af48616e5f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 18:22:40 +0900 Subject: [PATCH v2] tools/vm/slabinfo.c: fix sign-compare warning Currently we get the following compiler warning: slabinfo.c:854:22: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned integer expressions [-Wsign-compare] if (s->object_size < min_objsize) ^ due to the mismatch of signed/unsigned comparison. ->object_size and ->slab_size are never expected to be negative, so let's define them as unsigned int. Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- tools/vm/slabinfo.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/vm/slabinfo.c b/tools/vm/slabinfo.c index f82c2eaa859d..334b16db0ebb 100644 --- a/tools/vm/slabinfo.c +++ b/tools/vm/slabinfo.c @@ -30,8 +30,8 @@ struct slabinfo { int alias; int refs; int aliases, align, cache_dma, cpu_slabs, destroy_by_rcu; - int hwcache_align, object_size, objs_per_slab; - int sanity_checks, slab_size, store_user, trace; + unsigned int hwcache_align, object_size, objs_per_slab; + unsigned int sanity_checks, slab_size, store_user, trace; int order, poison, reclaim_account, red_zone; unsigned long partial, objects, slabs, objects_partial, objects_total; unsigned long alloc_fastpath, alloc_slowpath; -- 2.7.4