On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 20:21:40 -0700
Christopher Li <sparse@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 7:23 PM, Jeff Layton
> <jeff.layton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 12:51:02 -0700
> >> --- a/target.h
> >> +++ b/target.h
> >> @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ extern int enum_alignment;
> >>
> >> static inline int bits_to_bytes(int bits)
> >> {
> >> - return bits >= 0 ? bits / bits_in_char : -1;
> >> + return bits >= 0 ? (bits + bits_in_char - 1) / bits_in_char : -1;
> >> }
> >>
> >
> > This makes the bitfield.c validation test fail:
> >
> > TEST bitfield to integer promotion (bitfields.c)
> > error: actual error text does not match expected error text.
> > error: see bitfields.c.error.* for further investigation.
> > --- bitfields.c.error.expected 2014-07-15 22:01:09.236942195 -0400
> > +++ bitfields.c.error.got 2014-07-15 22:01:09.237942176 -0400
> > @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
> > +bitfields.c:16:19: warning: invalid access past the end of 'y' (0 1)
> > +bitfields.c:16:19: warning: invalid access past the end of 'y' (0 1)
> >
> > Though I haven't looked in detail yet as to why it's failing.
>
> Let me take a look and get back to you. I recall there are one more
> place in array handling need to use bits_to_bytes() instead of reference
> the bit size directly.
>
> Chris
Thanks, I think I might have found it. init_ctype tries to correct for
the fact that bits_to_bytes rounds up instead of down. With the
corrected function, we don't need that correction anymore.
I'll send the v2 patch soon, which seems to do the right thing.
Thanks!
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
