On Jul 22, 2013, at 3:03 PM, "Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-07-12 at 12:32 -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> Clean up. Squelch compiler warning:
>>
>> linux/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c: In function ‘nfs4_setup_sequence’:
>> linux/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c:703:2: warning: signed and unsigned type in
>> conditional expression [-Wsign-compare]
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
>> index 7b2e008..5913e1d 100644
>> --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
>> +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
>> @@ -655,7 +655,7 @@ static int nfs4_setup_sequence(const struct nfs_server *server,
>>
>> dprintk("--> %s clp %p session %p sr_slot %d\n",
>> __func__, session->clp, session, res->sr_slot ?
>> - res->sr_slot->slot_nr : -1);
>> + (int)res->sr_slot->slot_nr : -1);
>>
>
> Please convert to make it unsigned, and to use NFS4_NO_SLOT instead of
> '-1'.
NFS4_NO_SLOT makes sense, but I'm not clear on "make it unsigned".
Leaving the format as "%d" allows NFS4_NO_SLOT to be displayed as "-1". So, something like the following one-liner will address the compiler warning, and leave behavior unchanged:
- res->sr_slot->slot_nr : -1);
+ res->sr_slot->slot_nr : NFS4_NO_SLOT);
That is, unless you prefer NFS4_NO_SLOT displayed in some other way?
--
Chuck Lever
chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
