[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0ce6097e3c1a6b76610df9a4fb912dd0cb8941ee.camel@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 09:45:21 +0200
From: Luciano Coelho <luciano.coelho@...el.com>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>
Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
Emmanuel Grumbach <emmanuel.grumbach@...el.com>,
Intel Linux Wireless <linuxwifi@...el.com>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iwlwifi: mvm: Use div_s64 instead of do_div in
iwl_mvm_debug_range_resp
On Thu, 2019-02-21 at 16:13 -0800, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 12:08 AM Nathan Chancellor
> <natechancellor@...il.com> wrote:
> > Clang warns:
> >
> > drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/ftm-initiator.c:465:2:
> > warning:
> > comparison of distinct pointer types ('typeof ((rtt_avg)) *' (aka
> > 'long
> > long *') and 'uint64_t *' (aka 'unsigned long long *'))
> > [-Wcompare-distinct-pointer-types]
> > do_div(rtt_avg, 6666);
> > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > include/asm-generic/div64.h:222:28: note: expanded from macro
> > 'do_div'
> > (void)(((typeof((n)) *)0) == ((uint64_t *)0)); \
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > 1 warning generated.
> >
> > do_div expects an unsigned dividend. Use div_s64, which expects a
> > signed
> > dividend.
> >
> > Fixes: 937b10c0de68 ("iwlwifi: mvm: add debug prints for FTM")
> > Link: https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/372
> > Suggested-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>
> > ---
> >
> > v1 -> v2:
> >
> > * Fix logic (as the return value of div{,64}_s64 must be used),
> > thanks
> > to Arnd for the review.
>
> oh boy, sorry I missed that in the initial code review, thanks Arnd
> for the sharp eye!
> Reviewed-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>
Thanks, guys, I really didn't pay much attention when I applied the
previous versions either.
I have applied this in our internal tree and will send it out instead
of the previous one as part of our upstreaming process.
--
Cheers,
Luca.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists