[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080818074221.GD30694@elte.hu>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 09:42:21 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dbaryshkov@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...hat.com, Alexander Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockdep: fix spurious 'inconsistent lock state' warning
* Dmitry Baryshkov <dbaryshkov@...il.com> wrote:
> Since f82b217e3513fe3af342c0f3ee1494e86250c21c lockdep can output
> spurious warnings related to hwirqs due to hardirq_off shrinkage from
> int to bit-sized flag. Guard it with double negation to fix the
> warning.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dbaryshkov@...il.com>
good spotting! Applied to tip/core/urgent, thanks Dmitry.
I'm wondering, is there any way to teach gcc some sanity here - a safer
variant of bitfields, that is just not allowed to overflow into or
corrupt nearby fields? The fact that a benign looking hlock->state = 15
can corrupt other fields worries me quite a bit. Valid C semantics or
not, this is a totally dangerous construct. The space savings are very
real though, so it would be nice to get 'safer bitfields', somehow.
Ingo
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists