linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] include: Fix compile warning in include/linux/bitops.h

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]

Date:	Thu, 25 Aug 2011 00:29:53 +0900
From:	NamJae Jeon <linkinjeon@...il.com>
To:	arnd@...db.de
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] include: Fix compile warning in include/linux/bitops.h

Hi. Arnd.

I send a patch by the below your request.

Would you plz confirm it ?

Thanks.

2011/8/25 Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@...il.com>:
> The compile warning is caused by __const_hweight8 when using hweight_long with -Wsign-compare option.
> The reason is that the default return value of this macro is signed. So need type casting to remove warning.
>
> Signed-off-by: Namjae Jeon <linkinjeon@...il.com>
> ---
>  include/asm-generic/bitops/const_hweight.h |   18 +++++++++---------
>  1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/bitops/const_hweight.h b/include/asm-generic/bitops/const_hweight.h
> index fa2a50b..31b7fce 100644
> --- a/include/asm-generic/bitops/const_hweight.h
> +++ b/include/asm-generic/bitops/const_hweight.h
> @@ -4,15 +4,15 @@
>  /*
>  * Compile time versions of __arch_hweightN()
>  */
> -#define __const_hweight8(w)            \
> -      (        (!!((w) & (1ULL << 0))) +       \
> -       (!!((w) & (1ULL << 1))) +       \
> -       (!!((w) & (1ULL << 2))) +       \
> -       (!!((w) & (1ULL << 3))) +       \
> -       (!!((w) & (1ULL << 4))) +       \
> -       (!!((w) & (1ULL << 5))) +       \
> -       (!!((w) & (1ULL << 6))) +       \
> -       (!!((w) & (1ULL << 7))) )
> +#define __const_hweight8(w)    (unsigned long) \
> +       (       (!!((w) & (1ULL << 0))) +       \
> +               (!!((w) & (1ULL << 1))) +       \
> +               (!!((w) & (1ULL << 2))) +       \
> +               (!!((w) & (1ULL << 3))) +       \
> +               (!!((w) & (1ULL << 4))) +       \
> +               (!!((w) & (1ULL << 5))) +       \
> +               (!!((w) & (1ULL << 6))) +       \
> +               (!!((w) & (1ULL << 7))) )
>
>  #define __const_hweight16(w) (__const_hweight8(w)  + __const_hweight8((w)  >> 8 ))
>  #define __const_hweight32(w) (__const_hweight16(w) + __const_hweight16((w) >> 16))
> --
> 1.7.4.4
>
>
Yes, this looks correct to me. Could you send the change as a proper patch
with your Signed-off-by:?

       Arnd
--
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/