fix for incorrect assignment of signed expression to unsigned variable.
Signed-off-by: Kumar Amit Mehta <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_dcb.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_dcb.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_dcb.c
index 5682054..b90533a 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_dcb.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_dcb.c
@@ -2139,12 +2139,12 @@ static u8 bnx2x_dcbnl_get_cap(struct net_device *netdev, int capid, u8 *cap)
break;
default:
BNX2X_ERR("Non valid capability ID\n");
- rval = -EINVAL;
+ rval = EINVAL;
break;
}
} else {
DP(BNX2X_MSG_DCB, "DCB disabled\n");
- rval = -EINVAL;
+ rval = EINVAL;
}
DP(BNX2X_MSG_DCB, "capid %d:%x\n", capid, *cap);
@@ -2154,7 +2154,7 @@ static u8 bnx2x_dcbnl_get_cap(struct net_device *netdev, int capid, u8 *cap)
static int bnx2x_dcbnl_get_numtcs(struct net_device *netdev, int tcid, u8 *num)
{
struct bnx2x *bp = netdev_priv(netdev);
- u8 rval = 0;
+ s8 rval = 0;
DP(BNX2X_MSG_DCB, "tcid %d\n", tcid);
@@ -2188,7 +2188,7 @@ static int bnx2x_dcbnl_set_numtcs(struct net_device *netdev, int tcid, u8 num)
return -EINVAL;
}
-static u8 bnx2x_dcbnl_get_pfc_state(struct net_device *netdev)
+static u8 bnx2x_dcbnl_get_pfc_state(struct net_device *netdev)
{
struct bnx2x *bp = netdev_priv(netdev);
DP(BNX2X_MSG_DCB, "state = %d\n", bp->dcbx_local_feat.pfc.enabled);
@@ -2282,7 +2282,7 @@ static int bnx2x_set_admin_app_up(struct bnx2x *bp, u8 idtype, u16 idval, u8 up)
else {
/* app table is full */
BNX2X_ERR("Application table is too large\n");
- return -EBUSY;
+ return EBUSY;
}
/* up configured, if not 0 make sure feature is enabled */
@@ -2312,7 +2312,7 @@ static u8 bnx2x_dcbnl_set_app_up(struct net_device *netdev, u8 idtype,
break;
default:
DP(BNX2X_MSG_DCB, "Wrong ID type\n");
- return -EINVAL;
+ return EINVAL;
}
return bnx2x_set_admin_app_up(bp, idtype, idval, up);
}
@@ -2390,12 +2390,12 @@ static u8 bnx2x_dcbnl_get_featcfg(struct net_device *netdev, int featid,
break;
default:
BNX2X_ERR("Non valid featrue-ID\n");
- rval = -EINVAL;
+ rval = EINVAL;
break;
}
} else {
DP(BNX2X_MSG_DCB, "DCB disabled\n");
- rval = -EINVAL;
+ rval = EINVAL;
}
return rval;
@@ -2431,12 +2431,12 @@ static u8 bnx2x_dcbnl_set_featcfg(struct net_device *netdev, int featid,
break;
default:
BNX2X_ERR("Non valid featrue-ID\n");
- rval = -EINVAL;
+ rval = EINVAL;
break;
}
} else {
DP(BNX2X_MSG_DCB, "dcbnl call not valid\n");
- rval = -EINVAL;
+ rval = EINVAL;
}
return rval;
--
1.7.9.5
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 11:52:55AM -0700, Kumar Amit Mehta wrote:
> fix for incorrect assignment of signed expression to unsigned variable.
>
This fix isn't right.
> Signed-off-by: Kumar Amit Mehta <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_dcb.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_dcb.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_dcb.c
> index 5682054..b90533a 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_dcb.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_dcb.c
> @@ -2139,12 +2139,12 @@ static u8 bnx2x_dcbnl_get_cap(struct net_device *netdev, int capid, u8 *cap)
> break;
> default:
> BNX2X_ERR("Non valid capability ID\n");
> - rval = -EINVAL;
> + rval = EINVAL;
> break;
> }
> } else {
> DP(BNX2X_MSG_DCB, "DCB disabled\n");
> - rval = -EINVAL;
> + rval = EINVAL;
This function is called from dcbnl_getcap(). It returns zero on
success, but it's not clear what it should return on failure. But
certainly it's not a positive EINVAL.
> }
>
> DP(BNX2X_MSG_DCB, "capid %d:%x\n", capid, *cap);
> @@ -2154,7 +2154,7 @@ static u8 bnx2x_dcbnl_get_cap(struct net_device *netdev, int capid, u8 *cap)
> static int bnx2x_dcbnl_get_numtcs(struct net_device *netdev, int tcid, u8 *num)
> {
> struct bnx2x *bp = netdev_priv(netdev);
> - u8 rval = 0;
> + s8 rval = 0;
Just use "int" here.
>
> DP(BNX2X_MSG_DCB, "tcid %d\n", tcid);
>
> @@ -2188,7 +2188,7 @@ static int bnx2x_dcbnl_set_numtcs(struct net_device *netdev, int tcid, u8 num)
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> -static u8 bnx2x_dcbnl_get_pfc_state(struct net_device *netdev)
> +static u8 bnx2x_dcbnl_get_pfc_state(struct net_device *netdev)
> {
> struct bnx2x *bp = netdev_priv(netdev);
> DP(BNX2X_MSG_DCB, "state = %d\n", bp->dcbx_local_feat.pfc.enabled);
> @@ -2282,7 +2282,7 @@ static int bnx2x_set_admin_app_up(struct bnx2x *bp, u8 idtype, u16 idval, u8 up)
> else {
> /* app table is full */
> BNX2X_ERR("Application table is too large\n");
> - return -EBUSY;
> + return EBUSY;
> }
The fix for this is more involved. The function prototype should
be changed to return an int. The caller should be updated to check
for errors.
Etc.
regards,
dan carpenter
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 10:56:47PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 11:52:55AM -0700, Kumar Amit Mehta wrote:
> > fix for incorrect assignment of signed expression to unsigned variable.
> >
>
> This fix isn't right.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Kumar Amit Mehta <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_dcb.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
> > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_dcb.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_dcb.c
> > index 5682054..b90533a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_dcb.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnx2x/bnx2x_dcb.c
> > @@ -2139,12 +2139,12 @@ static u8 bnx2x_dcbnl_get_cap(struct net_device *netdev, int capid, u8 *cap)
> > break;
> > default:
> > BNX2X_ERR("Non valid capability ID\n");
> > - rval = -EINVAL;
> > + rval = EINVAL;
> > break;
> > }
> > } else {
> > DP(BNX2X_MSG_DCB, "DCB disabled\n");
> > - rval = -EINVAL;
> > + rval = EINVAL;
>
> This function is called from dcbnl_getcap(). It returns zero on
> success, but it's not clear what it should return on failure. But
> certainly it's not a positive EINVAL.
>
> > }
> >
> > DP(BNX2X_MSG_DCB, "capid %d:%x\n", capid, *cap);
> > @@ -2154,7 +2154,7 @@ static u8 bnx2x_dcbnl_get_cap(struct net_device *netdev, int capid, u8 *cap)
> > static int bnx2x_dcbnl_get_numtcs(struct net_device *netdev, int tcid, u8 *num)
> > {
> > struct bnx2x *bp = netdev_priv(netdev);
> > - u8 rval = 0;
> > + s8 rval = 0;
>
> Just use "int" here.
>
> >
> > DP(BNX2X_MSG_DCB, "tcid %d\n", tcid);
> >
> > @@ -2188,7 +2188,7 @@ static int bnx2x_dcbnl_set_numtcs(struct net_device *netdev, int tcid, u8 num)
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
> >
> > -static u8 bnx2x_dcbnl_get_pfc_state(struct net_device *netdev)
> > +static u8 bnx2x_dcbnl_get_pfc_state(struct net_device *netdev)
> > {
> > struct bnx2x *bp = netdev_priv(netdev);
> > DP(BNX2X_MSG_DCB, "state = %d\n", bp->dcbx_local_feat.pfc.enabled);
> > @@ -2282,7 +2282,7 @@ static int bnx2x_set_admin_app_up(struct bnx2x *bp, u8 idtype, u16 idval, u8 up)
> > else {
> > /* app table is full */
> > BNX2X_ERR("Application table is too large\n");
> > - return -EBUSY;
> > + return EBUSY;
> > }
>
> The fix for this is more involved. The function prototype should
> be changed to return an int. The caller should be updated to check
> for errors.
>
I wonder, why these callbacks are restricting the lower layers to return
only unsigned values, However Updating the prototype doesn't seem a good idea as
then it would require changes in various existing drivers.
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 01:45:11PM -0700, Kumar amit mehta wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 10:56:47PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> >
> > The fix for this is more involved. The function prototype should
> > be changed to return an int. The caller should be updated to check
> > for errors.
> >
> I wonder, why these callbacks are restricting the lower layers to return
> only unsigned values, However Updating the prototype doesn't seem a good idea as
> then it would require changes in various existing drivers.
Yes. Everything will need to be updated. I've known this code is
buggy for years but I've never tried patching it because I'm very
lazy. :)
But actually it's only three drivers I think: bnx2x, ixgbe, and
mlx4. I suspect that most of the functions always return zero and
won't need to be modified.
regards,
dan carpenter
From: Kumar Amit Mehta <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 11:52:55 -0700
> fix for incorrect assignment of signed expression to unsigned variable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kumar Amit Mehta <[email protected]>
Returning positive error codes is just as broken as what is there
currently.
These routines should return 0 or 1, the return value isn't even used
in any way, it is just tested against zero.