linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arch_numa: fix common code printing of phys_addr

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

Message-ID: <85b98720b27e45ade9bc9e78342cf2d926a729a7.camel@wdc.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 Jan 2021 20:10:07 +0000
From:   Atish Patra <Atish.Patra@....com>
To:     "rdunlap@...radead.org" <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:     "palmerdabbelt@...gle.com" <palmerdabbelt@...gle.com>,
        "lkp@...el.com" <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch_numa: fix common code printing of phys_addr_t

On Wed, 2021-01-27 at 19:55 -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> Fix build warnings in the arch_numa common code:
> 
> ../include/linux/kern_levels.h:5:18: warning: format '%Lx' expects
> argument of type 'long long unsigned int', but argument 3 has type
> 'phys_addr_t' {aka 'unsigned int'} [-Wformat=]
> ../drivers/base/arch_numa.c:360:56: note: format string is defined
> here
>   360 |    pr_warn("Warning: invalid memblk node %d [mem %#010Lx-
> %#010Lx]\n",
> ../drivers/base/arch_numa.c:435:39: note: format string is defined
> here
>   435 |  pr_info("Faking a node at [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n", start,
> end - 1);
> 
> Fixes: ae3c107cd8be ("numa: Move numa implementation to common code")
> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> Cc: Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>
> Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@...gle.com>
> ---
>  drivers/base/arch_numa.c |   13 +++++++------
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> --- linux-next-20210125.orig/drivers/base/arch_numa.c
> +++ linux-next-20210125/drivers/base/arch_numa.c
> @@ -355,11 +355,12 @@ static int __init numa_register_nodes(vo
>         /* Check that valid nid is set to memblks */
>         for_each_mem_region(mblk) {
>                 int mblk_nid = memblock_get_region_node(mblk);
> +               phys_addr_t start = mblk->base;
> +               phys_addr_t end = mblk->base + mblk->size - 1;
>  
>                 if (mblk_nid == NUMA_NO_NODE || mblk_nid >=
> MAX_NUMNODES) {
> -                       pr_warn("Warning: invalid memblk node %d [mem
> %#010Lx-%#010Lx]\n",
> -                               mblk_nid, mblk->base,
> -                               mblk->base + mblk->size - 1);
> +                       pr_warn("Warning: invalid memblk node %d [mem
> %pap-%pap]\n",
> +                               mblk_nid, &start, &end);
>                         return -EINVAL;
>                 }
>         }
> @@ -427,14 +428,14 @@ out_free_distance:
>  static int __init dummy_numa_init(void)
>  {
>         phys_addr_t start = memblock_start_of_DRAM();
> -       phys_addr_t end = memblock_end_of_DRAM();
> +       phys_addr_t end = memblock_end_of_DRAM() - 1;
>         int ret;
>  
>         if (numa_off)
>                 pr_info("NUMA disabled\n"); /* Forced off on command
> line. */
> -       pr_info("Faking a node at [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n", start,
> end - 1);
> +       pr_info("Faking a node at [mem %pap-%pap]\n", &start, &end);
>  
> -       ret = numa_add_memblk(0, start, end);
> +       ret = numa_add_memblk(0, start, end + 1);
>         if (ret) {
>                 pr_err("NUMA init failed\n");
>                 return ret;

Thanks for the fix.

Reviewed-by: Atish Patra <atish.patra@....com>


-- 
Regards,
Atish