[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <18f28bb5-d8ac-20a5-fd6a-932cda454209@acm.org>
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2022 20:07:20 -0700
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>, kbuild-all@...ts.01.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Ryusuke Konishi <konishi.ryusuke@...il.com>
Subject: Re: include/trace/events/nilfs2.h:191:1: sparse: sparse: cast to
restricted blk_opf_t
On 8/4/22 19:03, kernel test robot wrote:
> sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>)
> fs/nilfs2/segment.c: note: in included file (through include/trace/trace_events.h, include/trace/define_trace.h, include/trace/events/nilfs2.h):
>>> include/trace/events/nilfs2.h:191:1: sparse: sparse: cast to restricted blk_opf_t
>>> include/trace/events/nilfs2.h:191:1: sparse: sparse: cast to restricted blk_opf_t
>>> include/trace/events/nilfs2.h:191:1: sparse: sparse: restricted blk_opf_t degrades to integer
>>> include/trace/events/nilfs2.h:191:1: sparse: sparse: restricted blk_opf_t degrades to integer
>
> vim +191 include/trace/events/nilfs2.h
Hi Luc and Linus,
I think the above sparse warnings refer to the following macro:
#define is_signed_type(type) (((type)(-1)) < (type)1)
Is the current plan still to modify sparse such that it stops
complaining about the above macro?
See also
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-sparse/20220626095814.7wtma47w4sph7dha@mail/
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists