linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for August 7 (SGI UV)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20080807150750.162f816c.randy.dunlap@oracle.com>
Date:	Thu, 7 Aug 2008 15:07:50 -0700
From:	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Cliff Wickman <cpw@....com>
Cc:	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for August 7 (SGI UV)

(This may happen in mainline, but I haven't checked there.)

sparse complains about bitfields not being marked as signed or unsigned
and about one-bit bitfields being (default) signed (sign bit only!):

  CHECK   /local/linsrc/linux-next-20080807/arch/x86/kernel/tlb_64.c
include2/asm/uv/uv_bau.h:141:22: warning: dubious bitfield without explicit `signed' or `unsigned'
include2/asm/uv/uv_bau.h:143:25: warning: dubious bitfield without explicit `signed' or `unsigned'
include2/asm/uv/uv_bau.h:145:15: warning: dubious bitfield without explicit `signed' or `unsigned'
include2/asm/uv/uv_bau.h:148:14: warning: dubious bitfield without explicit `signed' or `unsigned'
include2/asm/uv/uv_bau.h:151:14: warning: dubious bitfield without explicit `signed' or `unsigned'
include2/asm/uv/uv_bau.h:154:18: warning: dubious bitfield without explicit `signed' or `unsigned'
include2/asm/uv/uv_bau.h:156:18: warning: dubious bitfield without explicit `signed' or `unsigned'
include2/asm/uv/uv_bau.h:160:14: error: dubious one-bit signed bitfield
include2/asm/uv/uv_bau.h:164:18: error: dubious one-bit signed bitfield
include2/asm/uv/uv_bau.h:178:19: error: dubious one-bit signed bitfield
include2/asm/uv/uv_bau.h:186:16: error: dubious one-bit signed bitfield
include2/asm/uv/uv_bau.h:190:18: error: dubious one-bit signed bitfield
include2/asm/uv/uv_bau.h:193:16: error: dubious one-bit signed bitfield
  CC      arch/x86/kernel/tlb_64.o


Can those struct bitfields be marked as signed or unsigned, please?

Thanks.

---
~Randy
Linux Plumbers Conference, 17-19 September 2008, Portland, Oregon USA
http://linuxplumbersconf.org/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/