On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 17:46:52 -0700 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Andrew Morton > <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > I can't really do anything with this patch - it's a bug added by > > Peter's "mm/mpol: Simplify do_mbind()" and added to linux-next via one > > of Ingo's trees. > > > > And I can't cleanly take the patch over as it's all bound up with the > > other changes for sched/numa balancing. > > I took the patch, it looked obviously correct (passing in a boolean > was clearly crap). Ah, OK, the bug was actually "retained" by "mm/mpol: Simplify do_mbind()". I do still ask what the plans are for that patchset.. > I wonder if I should make sparse warn about any casts to/from enums. > They tend to always be wrong. I think it would be worth trying, see how much fallout there is. Also casts from "enum a" to "enum b". We've had a few of those, unintentionally. And casts to/from bool, perhaps. To squish the warning we'd do things like a_bool = !!a_int. That generates extra code, but gcc internally generates extra code for a_bool = a_int anyway, and a quick test here indicates that the generated code is identical (testl/setne). It would be nice to find a way of converting an integer which is known to be 1 or 0 into a bool without generating any code, but I haven't found a way of tricking the compiler into doing that. It's all a bit of a downside to using bool at all. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>