[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150719152724.GB3729@roeck-us.net>
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2015 08:27:24 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
benh@...nel.crashing.org, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iommu-common: Do not use 64 bit constant
0xffffffffffffffffl for computing align_mask
On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 02:20:14PM +0200, Sowmini Varadhan wrote:
>
> Using a 64 bit constant generates "warning: integer constant is too
> large for 'long' type" on 32 bit platforms. Instead use ~0l to get
> the desired effect.
>
> Detected by Andrew Morton who has confirmed that this patch
> fixes the warning on i386/gcc-4.4.3, i386/gcc-4.4.0 and arm/gcc-4.4.4.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>
> ---
> lib/iommu-common.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/iommu-common.c b/lib/iommu-common.c
> index df30632..fd1297d 100644
> --- a/lib/iommu-common.c
> +++ b/lib/iommu-common.c
> @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ unsigned long iommu_tbl_range_alloc(struct device *dev,
> unsigned long align_mask = 0;
>
> if (align_order > 0)
> - align_mask = 0xffffffffffffffffl >> (64 - align_order);
> + align_mask = ~0l >> (64 - align_order);
>
Wonder if this just hides the real problem. Unless align_order
is very large, the resulting mask on 32 bit systems may be 0.
Is this really the idea ?
Guenter
--
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