[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171115082743.6nvdz3yk6ln2ftc5@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 09:27:43 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: luca abeni <luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: New sparse warnings from sched.h
* Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> commit 799ba82de01e7543f6b2042e1a739f3a20255f23
> Author: luca abeni <luca.abeni@...tannapisa.it>
> Date: Thu Sep 7 12:09:31 2017 +0200
>
> sched/deadline: Use C bitfields for the state flags
>
> Ask the compiler to use a single bit for storing true / false values,
> instead of wasting the size of a whole int value.
> Tested with gcc 5.4.0 on x86_64, and the compiler produces the expected
> Assembly (similar to the Assembly code generated when explicitly accessing
> the bits with bitmasks, "&" and "|").
>
> produces four warnings from sparse for every file which includes sched.h:
>
> ./include/linux/sched.h:476:62: error: dubious one-bit signed bitfield
> ./include/linux/sched.h:477:62: error: dubious one-bit signed bitfield
> ./include/linux/sched.h:478:62: error: dubious one-bit signed bitfield
> ./include/linux/sched.h:479:62: error: dubious one-bit signed bitfield
>
> This seems like the trivial fix (untested):
>
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index a5dc7c98b0a2..21991d668d35 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -473,10 +473,10 @@ struct sched_dl_entity {
> * conditions between the inactive timer handler and the wakeup
> * code.
> */
> - int dl_throttled : 1;
> - int dl_boosted : 1;
> - int dl_yielded : 1;
> - int dl_non_contending : 1;
> + unsigned int dl_throttled : 1;
> + unsigned int dl_boosted : 1;
> + unsigned int dl_yielded : 1;
> + unsigned int dl_non_contending : 1;
>
> /*
> * Bandwidth enforcement timer. Each -deadline task has its
Mind sending a proper patch with a SOB once it's tested?
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists