On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 07:08:06PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 07:00:17PM +0100, Luc Van Oostenryck wrote:
> > The issue here is that sparse has a whole class of warnings that are
> > given very early (here at expansion of constant expressions), before
> > eliminating code from branches that are never taken (which, surprise,
> > need itself to have constant expressions already expanded).
> >
> > It's often annoying like the case here.
> > OTOH, I don't think it's always a bad thing. Sometimes we want to
> > have warnings even from code we know will not be executed (in this
> > config but maybe it will in another one).
>
> Is that really a valid concern with all the automated randconfig
> building going on today?
I don't think so, for the kernel at least. For other uses it may.
But don't take me wrongly: I don't want to defend those warnings here,
I just want to say that the situation is not totally black & white.
One easy-short-term solution that wouldn't make things ugly would be
to use a mask instead of a cast:
static __always_inline unsigned long
cmpxchg_size(volatile void *ptr, unsigned long old, unsigned long new, int size)
{
switch (size) {
case 1:
- return arch_cmpxchg((u8 *)ptr, (u8)old, (u8)new);
+ return arch_cmpxchg((u8 *)ptr, old & 0xff, new & 0xff);
case 2:
- return arch_cmpxchg((u16 *)ptr, (u16)old, (u16)new);
+ return arch_cmpxchg((u16 *)ptr, old & 0xffff, new & 0xffff);
-- Luc
--
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
