linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH-next] locktorture: use true, false for bool variable

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 14 Apr 2020 13:56:44 -0700
From:   "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To:     Zou Wei <zou_wei@...wei.com>
Cc:     dave@...olabs.net, josh@...htriplett.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH-next] locktorture: use true, false for bool variable

On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 08:02:59PM +0800, Zou Wei wrote:
> Fixes coccicheck warning:
> 
> kernel/locking/locktorture.c:689:6-10: WARNING: Assignment of 0/1 to bool variable
> kernel/locking/locktorture.c:907:2-20: WARNING: Assignment of 0/1 to bool variable
> kernel/locking/locktorture.c:938:3-20: WARNING: Assignment of 0/1 to bool variable
> kernel/locking/locktorture.c:668:2-19: WARNING: Assignment of 0/1 to bool variable
> kernel/locking/locktorture.c:674:2-19: WARNING: Assignment of 0/1 to bool variable
> kernel/locking/locktorture.c:634:2-20: WARNING: Assignment of 0/1 to bool variable
> kernel/locking/locktorture.c:640:2-20: WARNING: Assignment of 0/1 to bool variable
> 
> Reported-by: Hulk Robot <hulkci@...wei.com>
> Signed-off-by: Zou Wei <zou_wei@...wei.com>

Applied, thank you!

							Thanx, Paul

> ---
>  kernel/locking/locktorture.c | 14 +++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
> index 5efbfc6..8ff6f50 100644
> --- a/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
> +++ b/kernel/locking/locktorture.c
> @@ -631,13 +631,13 @@ static int lock_torture_writer(void *arg)
>  		cxt.cur_ops->writelock();
>  		if (WARN_ON_ONCE(lock_is_write_held))
>  			lwsp->n_lock_fail++;
> -		lock_is_write_held = 1;
> +		lock_is_write_held = true;
>  		if (WARN_ON_ONCE(lock_is_read_held))
>  			lwsp->n_lock_fail++; /* rare, but... */
>  
>  		lwsp->n_lock_acquired++;
>  		cxt.cur_ops->write_delay(&rand);
> -		lock_is_write_held = 0;
> +		lock_is_write_held = false;
>  		cxt.cur_ops->writeunlock();
>  
>  		stutter_wait("lock_torture_writer");
> @@ -665,13 +665,13 @@ static int lock_torture_reader(void *arg)
>  			schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1);
>  
>  		cxt.cur_ops->readlock();
> -		lock_is_read_held = 1;
> +		lock_is_read_held = true;
>  		if (WARN_ON_ONCE(lock_is_write_held))
>  			lrsp->n_lock_fail++; /* rare, but... */
>  
>  		lrsp->n_lock_acquired++;
>  		cxt.cur_ops->read_delay(&rand);
> -		lock_is_read_held = 0;
> +		lock_is_read_held = false;
>  		cxt.cur_ops->readunlock();
>  
>  		stutter_wait("lock_torture_reader");
> @@ -686,7 +686,7 @@ static int lock_torture_reader(void *arg)
>  static void __torture_print_stats(char *page,
>  				  struct lock_stress_stats *statp, bool write)
>  {
> -	bool fail = 0;
> +	bool fail = false;
>  	int i, n_stress;
>  	long max = 0, min = statp ? statp[0].n_lock_acquired : 0;
>  	long long sum = 0;
> @@ -904,7 +904,7 @@ static int __init lock_torture_init(void)
>  
>  	/* Initialize the statistics so that each run gets its own numbers. */
>  	if (nwriters_stress) {
> -		lock_is_write_held = 0;
> +		lock_is_write_held = false;
>  		cxt.lwsa = kmalloc_array(cxt.nrealwriters_stress,
>  					 sizeof(*cxt.lwsa),
>  					 GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -935,7 +935,7 @@ static int __init lock_torture_init(void)
>  		}
>  
>  		if (nreaders_stress) {
> -			lock_is_read_held = 0;
> +			lock_is_read_held = false;
>  			cxt.lrsa = kmalloc_array(cxt.nrealreaders_stress,
>  						 sizeof(*cxt.lrsa),
>  						 GFP_KERNEL);
> -- 
> 2.6.2
>