[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121120042855.GE6186@mwanda>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 07:28:56 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Russ Anderson <rja@....com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>,
Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
rja@...ricas.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [patch] x86, UV: integer wrap bug in uv_hub_ipi_value()
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 06:48:34PM -0600, Russ Anderson wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 06:16:11PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > This is a static checker fix. The problem is that we store the bits
> > from "uv_apicid_hibits" into "apicid" (the high 16 bits) but then we
> > shift it 16 bit to the left. "apicid" is an int so it wraps and we lose
> > them.
>
> Is this the complete patch? phys_apicid is an int, but gets
> cast as unsigned long. Doesn't phys_apicid also have to be
> changed to unsigned long? And why ulong instead of uint (on x86_64)?
Uint is 32bit across all arches in linux and unix, according to
wikipedia. The wakeup_secondary_cpu() function pointer takes an int
so I couldn't change the parameter.
>
> I agree with changing signed to unsigned where appropriate, but
> this looks like a partial fix. Am I missing something?
>
I do feel a little embarrassed that I didn't use "unsigned long"
consistently. I just used ulong to make the line a bit shorter, but
I could redo it with "unsigned long" if you want.
regards,
dan carpenter
--
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