[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20131030155938.0f5416fe3c5c2cbd3f9cd319@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 15:59:38 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Michal Nazarewicz <mpn@...gle.com>
Cc: Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: w1: make w1_slave::flags long to avoid casts
On Sat, 26 Oct 2013 12:56:11 +0100 Michal Nazarewicz <mpn@...gle.com> wrote:
> From: Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>
>
> Changing flags field of the w1_slave to unsigned long may on
> some architectures increase the size of the structure, but
> otherwise makes the code more kosher as casting is avoided
> and *_bit family of calls do not attempt to operate on an
> entity of bigger size than realy is available.
>
> The current behaviour does not introduce any bugs (since any
> bytes past flags field are preserved)
hm, what does this mean....
> --- a/drivers/w1/w1.c
> +++ b/drivers/w1/w1.c
> @@ -709,7 +709,7 @@ static int w1_attach_slave_device(struct w1_master *dev, struct w1_reg_num *rn)
>
> sl->owner = THIS_MODULE;
> sl->master = dev;
> - set_bit(W1_SLAVE_ACTIVE, (long *)&sl->flags);
> + set_bit(W1_SLAVE_ACTIVE, &sl->flags);
... I'd have though that running this code on little-endian 64-bit
would result in a scribble over ...
> --- a/drivers/w1/w1.h
> +++ b/drivers/w1/w1.h
> @@ -67,8 +67,8 @@ struct w1_slave
> struct w1_reg_num reg_num;
> atomic_t refcnt;
> u8 rom[9];
> - u32 flags;
> int ttl;
... w1_slave.ttl?
> + unsigned long flags;
>
> struct w1_master *master;
> struct w1_family *family;
>
> ...
>
--
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