On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 12:06 PM, Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-01-15 at 10:06 +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> drivers/md/bcache/btree.c: In function ‘insert_u64s_remaining’:
>> drivers/md/bcache/btree.c:1816: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast
> []
>> diff --git a/drivers/md/bcache/btree.c b/drivers/md/bcache/btree.c
> []
>> @@ -1813,7 +1813,7 @@ static size_t insert_u64s_remaining(struct btree *b)
>> if (b->keys.ops->is_extents)
>> ret -= KEY_MAX_U64S;
>>
>> - return max(ret, 0L);
>> + return max_t(ssize_t, ret, 0L);
>
> why not
> return max(ret, 0);
Indeed, that also works, on both 32-bit and 64-bit.
Will resend, now all the issues moved from -next to Linus' tree.
> I think it odd that:
>
> drivers/md/bcache/bset.h:static inline size_t bch_btree_keys_u64s_remaining(struct btree_keys *b)
>
> and:
>
> static size_t insert_u64s_remaining(struct btree *b)
> {
> ssize_t ret = bch_btree_keys_u64s_remaining(&b->keys);
>
> /*
> * Might land in the middle of an existing extent and have to split it
> */
> if (b->keys.ops->is_extents)
> ret -= KEY_MAX_U64S;
>
> return max(ret, 0L);
> }
>
> so the only use of that size_t inline is cast to ssize_t
If the value returned by bch_btree_keys_u64s_remaining() is smaller
than KEY_MAX_U64S, it must stay negative after the subtraction,
instead of wrapping around to a big positive number. That's why ret is
ssize_t and not size_t.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
