[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150525055742.GE1397@opentech.at>
Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 07:57:42 +0200
From: Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@...r.at>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@...dl.org>,
Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cgroup: add explicit cast and comment for return type
conversion
On Sun, 24 May 2015, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 03:07:52PM +0200, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> > Type-checking coccinelle spatches are being used to locate type mismatches
> > between function signatures and return values in this case this produced:
> > ./kernel/cgroup.c:2525 WARNING: return of wrong type
> > ssize_t != size_t,
> >
> > Returning unsigned types converted to a signed type can be problematic
> > but in this case the size_t is <= PATH_MAX which is less than ulong/2 so
> > the conversion is safe - to make static code checking happy this is
> > resolved by an explicit cast and appropriate comment.
> >
> > Patch was compile tested with x86_64_defconfig (implies CONFIG_CGROUPS=y)
> >
> > Patch is against 4.1-rc4 (localversion-next is -next-20150522)
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@...dl.org>
> > ---
> >
> > Not sure if "cleanups" like this are acceptable - in this case I did not
> > find any better way to make static code checkers happy though.
> >
> > kernel/cgroup.c | 6 +++++-
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/cgroup.c b/kernel/cgroup.c
> > index b91177f..04de621 100644
> > --- a/kernel/cgroup.c
> > +++ b/kernel/cgroup.c
> > @@ -2523,7 +2523,11 @@ static ssize_t cgroup_release_agent_write(struct kernfs_open_file *of,
> > sizeof(cgrp->root->release_agent_path));
> > spin_unlock(&release_agent_path_lock);
> > cgroup_kn_unlock(of->kn);
> > - return nbytes;
> > +
> > + /* the path of the release notifier is <= PATH_MAX
> > + * so "downsizing" to signed long is safe here
> > + */
> > + return (ssize_t)nbytes;
>
> idk, does this actually help anything? This isn't different from any
> other implicit type casts. Are we gonna convert all downward implicit
> casts to be explicit?
>
nop not downward but signed/unsigned if it were down it would not be
a problem but signed/unsigned can be - for those cases where it can't
be fixed up by changing the declarations or return variable types
explicit cast might make sense - as noted in the patch Im not sure either
if this form of cleanups is helpful.
In the kernel core there are about 400 signed/unsigned implicit
conversions (about 3k in the entire kernel) which is what Im trying to
remove or if that is not possible in a resonable way mark as false positive.
thx!
hofrat
--
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