[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150413122911.GW10964@mwanda>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 15:31:09 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Peter Senna Tschudin <peter.senna@...il.com>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
driverdevel <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jun Tian <jun.j.tian@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Garret Kelly <garret.kelly@...il.com>,
Octavian Purdila <octavian.purdila@...el.com>,
Nick Kralevich <nnk@...gle.com>, Alan <alan@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix pointer cast for 32 bits arch
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 01:25:15PM +0200, Peter Senna Tschudin wrote:
> Line 4677 of http://pastebin.com/2bi9Dg7k looks like a bug
>
> diff -u -p a/arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c
> - regs->nip = (unsigned long) (unsigned long)ksig->ka.sa.sa_handler;
I don't know about "bug" but it does look uninentional, yes.
Double casting is probably a good thing to print a static checker
warning about.
Other static checkers complain about:
1) ~(char)foo;
(char)foo is type promoted to an int before the bitwise NOT.
2) (long *)&some_int
3) some_function((struct foo *)ptr);
Casting function arguments is almost always wrong. I check this
with Smatch. I don't remember the details.
4) (long long)(x + y)
Probably it should be (long long)x + y
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